Is it time for a serious conversation about Gun Control?

[alexava 6,973]

so now its the damn medias fault.\

[BamaGrad03 0]

so now its the damn medias fault.\

According to a number of well renowned mental health professionals, yes, yes it is.

Makes more sense than blaming an inanimate object, wouldn't you say?

[augolf1716 21,153]

Interesting that everyone always jumps to the guns. But nobody ever jumps on the media. Within minutes of this happening you had:

- media trying to contact friends of Adam on FB and Twitter

- media shoving cameras and mics into the faces of traumatized children

- media using the story for total link bait and revenue increase

- media sensationalizing the story with obvious falsehoods

- media today doing slideshows of the funeral images

EVERY SINGLE TIME one of these deals happens, the media sensationalizes and over reports the damn thing. They drive it into the ground. And they make these killers more than famous. They elevate them to levels of epic infamy.

It's not even the video games. We didn't have the saturated media coverage 30-40 years ago that we have now. We didn't have a media constantly focused on their revenue model absent of any morals or virtue, so this stuff didn't get sensationalized like it did now.

Why is nobody beating this drum?

We had guns 40 years ago. We had crazy people. The only things different are:

- over saturation of media motivated by profit

- a culture and society that drastically values life less than it did 40 years ago

^^This^^ the first 24 hours there was so much misinformation.

[Auburn85 432]

Interesting that everyone always jumps to the guns. But nobody ever jumps on the media. Within minutes of this happening you had:

- media trying to contact friends of Adam on FB and Twitter

- media shoving cameras and mics into the faces of traumatized children

- media using the story for total link bait and revenue increase

- media sensationalizing the story with obvious falsehoods

- media today doing slideshows of the funeral images

EVERY SINGLE TIME one of these deals happens, the media sensationalizes and over reports the damn thing. They drive it into the ground. And they make these killers more than famous. They elevate them to levels of epic infamy.

It's not even the video games. We didn't have the saturated media coverage 30-40 years ago that we have now. We didn't have a media constantly focused on their revenue model absent of any morals or virtue, so this stuff didn't get sensationalized like it did now.

Why is nobody beating this drum?

We had guns 40 years ago. We had crazy people. The only things different are:

- over saturation of media motivated by profit

- a culture and society that drastically values life less than it did 40 years ago

^^This^^ the first 24 hours there was so much misinformation.

+1

[Ouchyfish 67]

The media has already been partly blamed in this thread. Or do you mean society at large?

[BamaGrad03 0]

The media has already been partly blamed in this thread. Or do you mean society at large?

We're on an 18 page discussion about guns. There's no similar thread about the media coverage.

Thus illustrating my point.

It may be mentioned in passing, but it doesn't get the attention it deserves. Instead all the effort is wasted blaming guns.

[AUGradinTX 0]

It's a bit odd everyone is talking about banning "assault weapons" after the incident in CT. The weapon he had was not an assault rifle. That term is thrown around a bit much.

If the cartridge capacity is the issue with some of you, I wouldn't be against capping that. But, people who really wanted a 30-round cartridge would just make them themselves.

[Ouchyfish 67]

I don't trust nutjobs that have easy access to assault weapons with 30 to 100 magazines. Why do civilians *need* that capability?

These aren't muzzle loaded guns. Take away the long clips and what keeps them from carrying more standard ones?

Someone could still kill 20-30 people with two pistols and a whole lot of clips before anything could be done to effectively stop them.

So then they ban those clips too. Pretty soon every gun owner is playing one in the chamber. Then they take that away too because some crazy had a gym bag with 8 stolen pistols and killed 9 people somehow.

Then they ban guns altogether.

Sound impossible? So did a lot of other crap this government has pulled in the last few years...

[homersapien 11,373]

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!

First, I didn't say I supported you. And I do know you.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

It is not time to talk gun control. Everytime the gubermint want's to pass legislation they do something like this. Every single time.

Sources:

A clumsy 20 year old autistic kid -

http://www.cnn.com/2...file/index.html

dressed in camo -

http://dailycaller.c...nts-found-dead/

and full body armor -

http://www.motherjon...school-shooting

drives to another state -

http://www.inquisitr...d-both-parents/

Gets into a locked school looking like rambo-

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

kills 26 people with dead on accuracy -

http://www.cnn.com/2...ting/index.html

at a school his mother, (a retired teacher no one ever heard of before) used to work there in years before - http://www.cbsnews.c...ok-for-answers/

after allegedly killing her ...-

http://www.niticentr...t-happened.html

with the gun that belonged to her in the first place -

http://www.cnn.com/2...file/index.html

http://newsfeed.time...he-schoolhouse/

Then takes his own life

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

http://www.secretsof...ount-of-events/

And who shot Kennedy and why?

He'd been shooting guns and going to gun ranges for years. His mom took he and his brother to them herself many times.

Your tinfoil hat meme is wrong.

I was just pointing out the facts. There is a solution though.

[homersapien 11,373]

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.

Thanks for reinforcing my point.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

I don't trust nutjobs that have easy access to assault weapons with 30 to 100 magazines. Why do civilians *need* that capability?

These aren't muzzle loaded guns. Take away the long clips and what keeps them from carrying more standard ones?

Someone could still kill 20-30 people with two pistols and a whole lot of clips before anything could be done to effectively stop them.

So then they ban those clips too. Pretty soon every gun owner is playing one in the chamber. Then they take that away too because some crazy had a gym bag with 8 stolen pistols and killed 9 people somehow.

Then they ban guns altogether.

Sound impossible? So did a lot of other crap this government has pulled in the last few years...

If you take away the guns they'll use even more creative ways to murder and end up killing even more people.

[homersapien 11,373]

Great. Tie the hands of all would-be gun owners. Street thugs don't buy them legally, my friend. Your ideas of regulations won't do diddly. Yeah this crazy kid got his moms guns but would it really have been that hard to find elsewhere if he had to?

Some of us think in terms of bending the trend line instead of immediate results.

[homersapien 11,373]

What is the purpose of civilians owning assault weapons with 30 round mags? None. I don't have an issue with handguns even Glocks were targeted to reduce magazine sizes. Although you can still buy high capacity clips. Why the fixation on owning assault weapons?

All weapons are assualt weapons when the intent is to assault another individual.

As in the 1790's, the basic musket was considered the "assault" weapon of it's time. When the people have their rights infringed upon the government rarely stops at just one thing. Automatic weapons are already illegal. Next, the government wants to restrict magazine size.....next it will be semi-auto....until finally it's handguns and shotguns.

When will people learn that bad people do bad things and the tools they use doesn't keep them from being bad people. Oklahoma City comes to mind.

No, you are wrong.

While all weapons - or tools for that matter - can be used to assault other people, they were not designed for that. They were designed for hunting or self-defense.

Assault weapons were designed specifically for high intensity military combat which emphasizes effect and rate of fire, including the necessity of re-loading. There is no justifiable civilian use for them. One does not require a 30 round magazine to defend oneself.

Would you draw a line anywhere? I seems you resent the automatic weapons regulations. How about hand grenades?

[homersapien 11,373]

get ready, assault rifles, high capacity clips are going away. more thorough testing and accountability are going to be required for handgun ownership. its going to cost $. it is time for it. i will gladly pay to prove i am competent enough to own my guns and be responsible that they dont end up in the wrong hands. im not predicting an all out ban like some conservatives will cry. just some common sense adjustments. it will take years, decades to see the benefits but it has to be done now.

Criminals don't give a rats ass about it, because they will never follow the rules.

So we should just eliminate all rules (laws)?

(Hint: Criminals, by definition, don't follow the rules.)

I suggest you think more before posting.

[Ouchyfish 67]

That's not bending the trend line. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[Ouchyfish 67]

What is the purpose of civilians owning assault weapons with 30 round mags? None. I don't have an issue with handguns even Glocks were targeted to reduce magazine sizes. Although you can still buy high capacity clips. Why the fixation on owning assault weapons?

All weapons are assualt weapons when the intent is to assault another individual.

As in the 1790's, the basic musket was considered the "assault" weapon of it's time. When the people have their rights infringed upon the government rarely stops at just one thing. Automatic weapons are already illegal. Next, the government wants to restrict magazine size.....next it will be semi-auto....until finally it's handguns and shotguns.

When will people learn that bad people do bad things and the tools they use doesn't keep them from being bad people. Oklahoma City comes to mind.

No, you are wrong.

While all weapons - or tools for that matter - can be used to assault other people, they were not designed for that. They were designed for hunting or self-defense.

Assault weapons were designed specifically for high intensity military combat which emphasizes effect and rate of fire, including the necessity of re-loading. There is no justifiable civilian use for them. One does not require a 30 round magazine to defend oneself.

Would you draw a line anywhere? I seems you resent the automatic weapons regulations. How about hand grenades?

Honest question, not an argument. What is the ratio of people owning those crazy military guns compared to those that commit crimes with them?

Compared with.......

All other sorta hippy-friendly guns used in crimes?

[3rdgen 2]

What is the purpose of civilians owning assault weapons with 30 round mags? None. I don't have an issue with handguns even Glocks were targeted to reduce magazine sizes. Although you can still buy high capacity clips. Why the fixation on owning assault weapons?

All weapons are assualt weapons when the intent is to assault another individual.

As in the 1790's, the basic musket was considered the "assault" weapon of it's time. When the people have their rights infringed upon the government rarely stops at just one thing. Automatic weapons are already illegal. Next, the government wants to restrict magazine size.....next it will be semi-auto....until finally it's handguns and shotguns.

When will people learn that bad people do bad things and the tools they use doesn't keep them from being bad people. Oklahoma City comes to mind.

No, you are wrong.

While all weapons - or tools for that matter - can be used to assault other people, they were not designed for that. They were designed for hunting or self-defense.

Assault weapons were designed specifically for high intensity military combat which emphasizes effect and rate of fire, including the necessity of re-loading. There is no justifiable civilian use for them. One does not require a 30 round magazine to defend oneself.

Would you draw a line anywhere? I seems you resent the automatic weapons regulations. How about hand grenades?

The guns sold to civilians are not military grade weapons. These weapons fire a single shot with each pull of the trigger. Military weapons fire a three round burst with each pull and have a selector switch for full auto. As others have said if you limit magazine capacity people will only carry more mags . Or more guns if you take away magazine fed weapons. Also you can obtain grenades with a 200 dollar tax stamp on each one purchased and then proof that each has been expended once it has been used.

[homersapien 11,373]

This argument over assault weapons is stupid. It is simply a buzz phrase to scare people. Any weapon is capable of doing as much damage. Anyone has access to a 12 gauge pump shotgun capable of firing double 00 buckshot. Each shell holding between 8-18 pellet each the equivalent of a 32 caliber pistol bullet. So with a single cycle through the magazine with no reloads 56-136 32 caliber bullets are being fired. In a confined space or in the hands of an inexperienced shooter that is much more dangerous than any semi automatic rifle which is prone to jams if not properly maintained or if firing large numbers of rounds at one time. Also if you intend to ban all semi autos as the Australians have done you have the problem of rifles like the British smle which in semi proficent hands is capable of achieving rates of fire of 30 aimed shots a minute. If it is the caliber that bothers people then you still have a problem in that you can get rifles and pistols in 22 long rifle. These rounds are small cheap and still capable of killing at a mile distance. Also if you are thinking of outlawing detachable magazines there are 22 rifles that have tube magazines capable of holding 19 rounds more if you are using 22 shorts. All this boils down to the fact that outlawing specific types of guns won't limit these incidents. It also won't decrease the lethality. It will just give a different boogeyman for those to point at as they use these incidents to advance their agendas under the guise of increasing safety by limiting the freedoms of law abiding citizens.

Ah yes, the totally expected sporting/military technical argument. But a pretty pitiful one.

So a tubular feed .22 will hold a bunch of shorts. Well hell, that's reason right there for keeping assault rifles available at the local WalMart!

[homersapien 11,373]

As to those who can't see the use of these weapons or high capacity magazines in civilian hands. I would point to things like Katrina, the LA riots, or any other various instances when the rule of law breaks down. When the police aren't coming and single person may be faced with a mob of people. In which case these weapons are extremely useful for one to have around.

Nice apocalyptic fantasy you have there. Except in the real world, a pump shotgun would be no less (extremely) useful than an assault rifle. (Unless your fantasy includes zombies)

[3rdgen 2]

As to those who can't see the use of these weapons or high capacity magazines in civilian hands. I would point to things like Katrina, the LA riots, or any other various instances when the rule of law breaks down. When the police aren't coming and single person may be faced with a mob of people. In which case these weapons are extremely useful for one to have around.

seriously? It must be sad living in a state of constant fear; Government tyranny, poles swapping, civil unrest, natural disasters, walking dead...nothing a bushmaster can't fix right? These people that claim that all guns are assault weapons is nothing more than a scare tactic based on a spurious argument. The fact is there is no reason for a civilian to own an AK or AR assault weapon, none. If you live in constant fear of zombies, riots, floods and/or mass civil unrest then there are medical treatments available to help you.

Wow I missed where I said anything about living in constant fear. But if that is how you interpreted my post. Then it is just as valid as living in fear of so called assault weapons and 30 rd magazines as a boogeyman that mysteriously kills without a human behind them. Besides I missed the part in the Bill of Rights where I had to justify the exercising of my rights to you or anyone else.

[3rdgen 2]

As to those who can't see the use of these weapons or high capacity magazines in civilian hands. I would point to things like Katrina, the LA riots, or any other various instances when the rule of law breaks down. When the police aren't coming and single person may be faced with a mob of people. In which case these weapons are extremely useful for one to have around.

Nice apocalyptic fantasy you have there. Except in the real world, a pump shotgun would be no less (extremely) useful than an assault rifle. (Unless your fantasy includes zombies)

:homer:/>

So you are admitting a shotgun is as dangerous as an assault rifle?

[alexava 6,973]

How many of you idiots thst are opposed to banning high capacity assault weapons actually own one?

[homersapien 11,373]

.... the guy with the "assault" rifles my new best friend.

.....it starts with one thing and then pretty soon we're back to bows and arrows.

..... Why aren't people this crazy about drunk drivers? blah blah blah

...... second-hand smoke or from outright smoking? blah blah blah

....you all want to continue to uncontrollably expel excrement when you hear about gun crimes..or "assault" weapons...

.....Twelve Americans are murdered every day by illegal aliens

......Do you think they are just waltzing in here with a bag of oranges or a bag of tools innocently looking for a chance to make it in the world?

......Keep thinking we don't need guns...keep thinking we aren't at risk from some invading "army".

Well, it's certainly hard to argue with that!

Congratulations, that's worth three :Homers"

:homer:

[Ouchyfish 67]

As to those who can't see the use of these weapons or high capacity magazines in civilian hands. I would point to things like Katrina, the LA riots, or any other various instances when the rule of law breaks down. When the police aren't coming and single person may be faced with a mob of people. In which case these weapons are extremely useful for one to have around.

Nice apocalyptic fantasy you have there. Except in the real world, a pump shotgun would be no less (extremely) useful than an assault rifle. (Unless your fantasy includes zombies)

Against what? A flock of doves? There's a reason our military doesn't primarily use pump shotguns. If someone wants to defend themselves like a soldier, they should be entitled to. It doesn't become a problem until they use it against innocent people. Same goes for drinking alcohol or driving a car. When they combine the two and risk others' lives, then you have a problem. Should you ban either?