Another mass shooting g

[jimjamuser]

When we were kids had pea shooters, carpet guns and cap pistols and we all carried around pocket knives even to school.

Had fish fights and noone even thought of taking out their knives.

Had all kind of cowboy and war movies and rather violent cartoons so we were also exposed to violence and we all survived.

There are over 400 million guns in this country how in the world would you get rid of them?

Have no clue how to fix this problem but defunding the police will not help.
Australia melted down ALL of their civilian-owned semi-automatic rifles. Then almost zero mass murders. Are we so STUPID that we can't do what Australia did?

[The Chipster]

Our national addiction to guns, including assault rifles, is like a broken record. I am sick of the washed out debates and countless massacres, while congress does absolutely nothing. We all know what is the ONLY way this will change . . . elect a particular political party in enough numbers that will control Congress and finally bring sanity to this heartbroken country. Period.

[jimbomaybe]

From about 1950 to 1985 if you read a Guns magazine, the articles were about where to hunt pheasants and deer - and what shotgun or bolt-action rifle was best for deer. Also some articles about hunting in Alaska, Canada, or even Africa. THEN, that all changed because the GUN MANUFACTURERS found out that fewer people were going hunting and that there were larger PROFITS to make in selling to FOOLS....... MILITARY-STYLE semi-automatics AKA MAN KILLERS !!!!!!!

Businesses supply what people want, as far as availability I can remember a time when you could get a M1 through the mail, no questions

[jimjamuser]

350 million guns have not been around forever. And it is growing at historic rates, just like school shootings - coincidence? Number of guns has tripled since 2000. You remember 2000? The year after the first school shooting - Columbine.

Yeah, another thing that has changed, concerning what has changed, just a week ago wasn't it that the crazy quoted Replacement theory for killing 10 people.

Whack jobs are everywhere, in every country in every society. Only the US has mass shootings in school - constantly. Only in the US. What does the US have that no other country in the world has? 350 MILLION guns in circulation.

I have NOTHING against responsible gun owners or gun ownership. I can't think of ANY way 350 million guns can be collected. It is NOT going to happen.

So, how about we all get together and figure out a way to keep responsible gun owners happy and armed, while at the same time creating fewer mourning parents. 231 school shootings in the 22 years since Columbine.

Or, would everyone like to just keep calling each other naming and spewing "facts" like guns don't kill people. Yeah guns do nothing until a person picks it up, the gun is used to kill 21 people in under 2 minutes.

I have heard someone say crazies will find a way, like using a car to drive into a crowd. Yeah, true, and when was the last time a crazy drove a car into a crowded class room and killed 19 children?
My solution is to manufacture only single shot or bolt action rifles and pistols for civilian use starting soon. Then Police can MELT down all semi-autos that they pick up in criminal hands. Also, Police could buy back semi-autos. Eventually, all weapons would be single shot or bolt action. It WOULD take a long time to get ALL semi-autos off the street. But, if you got 10% out of circulation in 5 years, it should lead to a 10% drop in mass murders. At least, that IS A WORKABLE SOLUTION. And it would take ZERO guns away from law abiding citizens, thus 2nd amendment protection.

[Scbang]

Not so sure availability of firearms is the cause. Understand there is a huge number of firearms owned by residents of the villages. When was the last time they were improperly used?

Happy people having fun have nothing to do with the gun violence.
Easy availability of semi-auto guns for miserable people is asking for trouble.

Sadness

[jimjamuser]

350 million guns have not been around forever. And it is growing at historic rates, just like school shootings - coincidence? Number of guns has tripled since 2000. You remember 2000? The year after the first school shooting - Columbine.

Yeah, another thing that has changed, concerning what has changed, just a week ago wasn't it that the crazy quoted Replacement theory for killing 10 people.

Whack jobs are everywhere, in every country in every society. Only the US has mass shootings in school - constantly. Only in the US. What does the US have that no other country in the world has? 350 MILLION guns in circulation.

I have NOTHING against responsible gun owners or gun ownership. I can't think of ANY way 350 million guns can be collected. It is NOT going to happen.

So, how about we all get together and figure out a way to keep responsible gun owners happy and armed, while at the same time creating fewer mourning parents. 231 school shootings in the 22 years since Columbine.

Or, would everyone like to just keep calling each other naming and spewing "facts" like guns don't kill people. Yeah guns do nothing until a person picks it up, the gun is used to kill 21 people in under 2 minutes.

I have heard someone say crazies will find a way, like using a car to drive into a crowd. Yeah, true, and when was the last time a crazy drove a car into a crowded class room and killed 19 children?
I heard that Police did NOT arrive for over one HOUR. There are a lot of details about this massacre that need better answers. The Texas Ranger spokesmen seemed to" hem and haw" when asked about the response time?

[Scbang]

Businesses supply what people want, as far as availability I can remember a time when you could get a M1 through the mail, no questions

That logic applies to drugs, tobacco and guns (and almost everything else we buy). The truth is business (including drug dealers) is constantly researching ways to create demands legally and/or illegally. Unfortunately, their easy target preys are often young kids.

Sad

[jimjamuser]

Absolutely, 100% NO. The day our military is used in our country is the day our country ends.
A country ends slowly. Canada is so WORRIED about the loss of democracy in the US that they have studied and prepared for the day that the US may change into an autocracy.

[Stu from NYC]

I heard that Police did NOT arrive for over one HOUR. There are a lot of details about this massacre that need better answers. The Texas Ranger spokesmen seemed to" hem and haw" when asked about the response time?

Appears that just like the one in Ft Lauderdale a few years back the police took way to long to provide the help they are sworn to do.

Hopefully there will be a full and impartial investigation of the response time.

[jimjamuser]

One would be foolish to believe that guns are the problem. There are kids and adults that are mentally unstable, some take medications, others seek help, some do not. If an unstable person gets a gun, whether it be legal or illegally and if they have bad intentions, how is anyone to know if they plan to do harm to others ?Criminals on the other hand carry guns with the intentions if they are cornered or interrupted during their crime they will no doubt shoot someone. Those folks that have purchased a gun legally have the intentions of protecting themselves or their love ones. Sadly we see that mass murders in US has seen more than 200 mass shootings since January.
GUNS ARE the PROBLEM. To understand this better just research how Australia and New Zealand SOLVED, yes SOLVED their mass murders and gun crime problems. They DID it, we can too!

[spd2918]

..........I am in favor of the 2nd amendment and having gun ownership for home protection, shooting targets, and hunting. I am NOT in favor of semi-automatic rifles that the NRA and the gun manufacturers PREFER because of high mark-up and profits paid for by the blood of children. Let's return to the 1950s when guns were for hunting game and NOT HUNTING PEOPLE !!!!!!!

The 2nd Ammendment is not about hunting or home protection.
It's about the people having the means to resist a tyranical government.

All "semi-automatic" means is the next bullet is loaded after the last is shot. A revolver loads the next bullet by trigger squeeze (or thumb cocking) and anyone with any skill can achieve the same rate of fire as an AR15. Besides, shooting fast means less accuracy, so it's a wash.

As for the New Zealand and Australia argument, they didn't have many mass shooting before confiscation. Australia did force people into quarantine detention during covid. They could because they did not fear an armed populace.

And the reason gun ownership is up is because people fear a tyranical government. When Seattle allowed a group of Communist thugs to take over the city, people bought guns. When those same Communist thugs laid seige to a Federal Courthouse in Portland, people bought guns.

I'm all for personal choice. If you don't like guns, don't buy one.

[jimjamuser]

In the "Wild West Days" ammunition capacity was limited to six shots or whatever the rifles of the times held. Now with the AR type weapons, the capacity has increased multiple times. Is there any need for these types of weapons? Can you hunt legally with them?
I believe that the Texas shooter carried 5 spare 30-round "banana clip" magazines with him. I would call for the outlaw of those types of CLIPS as a 1st step toward less NRA propaganda-backed MAN-KILLING weapons of MASS MURDER.
.........Guns DO kill people ........in the sense that semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and pistols are capable of producing more shots per time period - than single action and bolt action weapons.
......... So certain GUNS Do kill people more effectively than others!

[jimjamuser]

I feel the same way about video games. Why do they never investigate what kind of video games a shooter watched? Hollywood elites scream their outrage and demand gun control. yet they produce ever more violent movies and tv shows with bigger and bigger guns! Video games get more realistic and more despicably violent! We desensitize children to the value of life! Death becomes less "real"!
Because these SAME videos are seen by young people in All countries around the globe and ONLY the US is, BY FAR, the # 1 country in gun violence and mass murders. The overwhelming factor is GUN accessibility.(and semi-automatics)

[PugMom]

The 2nd Ammendment is not about hunting or home protection.
It's about the people having the means to resist a tyranical government.

All "semi-automatic" means is the next bullet is loaded after the last is shot. A revolver loads the next bullet by trigger squeeze (or thumb cocking) and anyone with any skill can achieve the same rate of fire as an AR15. Besides, shooting fast means less accuracy, so it's a wash.

As for the New Zealand and Australia argument, they didn't have many mass shooting before confiscation. Australia did force people into quarantine detention during covid. They could because they did not fear an armed populace.

And the reason gun ownership is up is because people fear a tyranical government. When Seattle allowed a group of Communist thugs to take over the city, people bought guns. When those same Communist thugs laid seige to a Federal Courthouse in Portland, people bought guns.

I'm all for personal choice. If you don't like guns, don't buy one.

:clap2::clap2::clap2:

[PugMom]

Because these SAME videos are seen by young people in All countries around the globe and ONLY the US is, BY FAR, the # 1 country in gun violence and mass murders. The overwhelming factor is GUN accessibility.(and semi-automatics)

they used to say the same thing when i was a kid regarding horror movies. the extreme kind, like chainsaw massacre or dawn of the dead. i grew up on that stuff & never became a twisted mass murderer or zombie. dittos on video games, not every kid who plays call of duty grows up to be a killer

[jimjamuser]

Could not agree with you more. Let’s also look at Hollywood and the movies they make.
If movies were the problem then all countries would have the large (# 1) rating for gun violence that the US has. And mental health is the same around the globe. This IS PROOF positive that the US AVAILABILITY of guns IS the FACTOR making the US by far the # 1 for gun violence. Just look it up, please!

[Topspinmo]

Throughout the WHOLE world, children play the SAME kind of violent video games. The UK, Germany, and all other countries have an INSIGNIFICANT amount of gun violence compared to the US which is, BY FAR, # 1 . Also mental health is nearly constant throughout the world, so not really a factor! The differentiating factor is that the AVAILABILITY OF GUNS in the US is sssssoooo much greater.

Or those countries raise kid’s better? 20x population means 20x problems. Only China and India has more population that USA. We know why China don’t have problems (not reported) and non availability. India 80% dirt poor and can’t afford pair good shoes.

[jimjamuser]

Did it stop everyone from smoking …….nope
It decreased smoking considerably!

[Topspinmo]

they used to say the same thing when i was a kid regarding horror movies. the extreme kind, like chainsaw massacre or dawn of the dead. i grew up on that stuff & never became a twisted mass murderer or zombie. dittos on video games, not every kid who plays call of duty grows up to be a killer


But, it only takes few out of millions. Call duty rather mild compared to others and I bet majority kids aren’t playing that one? IMO Chain saw massacre non player 99% couldn’t even start the chain saw.

[jimjamuser]

Absolutely!

Back in the day, the "day" in question being 1965, guns in school was nothing out of the ordinary. Gun safety training was offered at the high school I attended and on the range days seeing kids with guns on buses was totally normal. We had to store them at the Principal's office until range time but the ammo we just carried loose in our pockets. Oh--and no self-respecting lad at my school would EVER be caught without his trusty Barlow pocket knife. Saw a teacher borrow one from a kid one time when the pencil sharpener was on the fritz.

The three biggest behavior problems were talking in class, chewing gum and running in the halls. And even then, you didn't want your parents knowing. Mom and Dad had a talk with each of us at a young age: "never get in trouble at school and complain to us about it, because you'll be in twice as much trouble when you get home". And they meant it.

Oh--just about all of came from two married parents households, raised to take responsibility for our actions, respect hard work, and to take pride in academic accomplishments. One of the proudest days of my high-school life was when I was invited to join the National Honor Society. School was a privilege, not an obligation.

Guns were as deadly back then as they are now. But being raised in the right circumstances, with the right values, meant that we respected guns much as would respect any other tool. Blaming the guns for today's ills is on the same par as blaming the fork because you gained ten pounds. Want to fix the problem? Fix the FAMILY.
Back then there were no 30-round "banana clips" or kevlar vests readily available. Guns were for hunting animals NOT PEOPLE. Today IS VERY different from 1965!

[Topspinmo]

It decreased smoking considerably!

Just switched to vaping.

[jimjamuser]

Sorry, but PEOPLE are the problem, not guns. Take away the bad people and you have no problems. Take away the tools, and you still have the bad people and you still have the same problem, only a different method. When a child hits another child with a toy fire truck and you take the toy away from him, he will just find some other means to bully the other child. Take away the bad child (or correct him in such manner that makes him too scared of the consequences) and you eliminate the problem. Taking away the tool of the crime does not eliminate the causation.

You can stop a shooter with another shooter. If the bad guy uses a bomb instead, you cannot stop him with another bomb. If he uses a knife, do you stop him with another knife? If you outlaw all means of violence, someone will just invent a new method. The answer is to eliminate the cause of the violence. If you cannot fix the person then you must eliminate his ability to perpetrate violence. You lock him up, or in extreme cases you put him down.
The point is to compare the US gun violence to other countries' gun violence. That's the important point.

[MrFlorida]

I remember when the adults blamed watching violent TV shows for bad des done by the kids. We've moved on.

Go ask your grand kids for one of their video games, it just might surprise you !

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Absolutely!

Back in the day, the "day" in question being 1965, guns in school was nothing out of the ordinary. Gun safety training was offered at the high school I attended and on the range days seeing kids with guns on buses was totally normal. We had to store them at the Principal's office until range time but the ammo we just carried loose in our pockets. Oh--and no self-respecting lad at my school would EVER be caught without his trusty Barlow pocket knife. Saw a teacher borrow one from a kid one time when the pencil sharpener was on the fritz.

The three biggest behavior problems were talking in class, chewing gum and running in the halls. And even then, you didn't want your parents knowing. Mom and Dad had a talk with each of us at a young age: "never get in trouble at school and complain to us about it, because you'll be in twice as much trouble when you get home". And they meant it.

Oh--just about all of came from two married parents households, raised to take responsibility for our actions, respect hard work, and to take pride in academic accomplishments. One of the proudest days of my high-school life was when I was invited to join the National Honor Society. School was a privilege, not an obligation.

Guns were as deadly back then as they are now. But being raised in the right circumstances, with the right values, meant that we respected guns much as would respect any other tool. Blaming the guns for today's ills is on the same par as blaming the fork because you gained ten pounds. Want to fix the problem? Fix the FAMILY.

That boat has sailed. Your generation refuses to accept responsibility for the lousy teaching of the generation that actually raised today's kids. If only those kids' parents had better role models (their own parents) then maybe the grandkids wouldn't be so rotten today.

You want to fix the family, then stop telling kids it's okay to carry around AR-15s.

[jimjamuser]

An AR-15 is not a military weapon. Think of a .22 rifle with an ammo clip.
Better to visualize a semi-automatic HIGH-VELOCITY man-KILLING rifle with a 30 round banana clip (which SHOULD be illegal) At minimum, the clip should be illegal.

[jimjamuser]

I dont think so. Growing up there were series on TV about war (Combat) with lots of people getting shot and blown up every week. Remember all the war movies about WW II and Korea.

Lots of cowboy and indians shows and movies with people getting killed in the hundreds.

We used to play a game with knives called land where we took a pocket knife and threw it into the ground near our feet. Dumb of course but we all did it.

How the world has changed.
Knives?????? We used to shoot arrows straight up into the air and see how close they would drop. Total insanity!

[jimjamuser]

Whose god do you want in schools? Yours. I don't want my kid indoctrinated. Your god is banned from schools by the Constitution.
Yes, all this God talk seems excessive.

[jimjamuser]

Yep, 350 million plus hard core crazy killers and murderers. Now if want to come up with reasonable solutions? No semiautomatic hand guns, no semiautomatic rifles with magazines over 5 rounds or no semiautomatic rifles. No extended magazines. No guns will never happen, but limitations can work. No society is actually free so the free country argument out the window.
Yes, agreed!

[jimjamuser]

Police /military ok , everybody else muzzleloaders
Actually, that would work if only the Police and the military had cartridge weapons. You could hunt, protect your home, and shoot targets with muzzleloaders. I would be happy with just a bow and arrow even.

[jimjamuser]

A Ruger 10/22 is a semiauto 22cal rifle that allows one to insert magazines that will hold anywhere from 10 to 50 rounds of ammo or more. Is that an assault weapon? Or, is it not used by the military so it is not considered dangerous? M-16's and AR-15's are basically 22cal rifles (223). Pellet rifles can be purchased that are fully automatic and legal. You can purchase a 22cal fully automatic pellet rifle or pistol without a background check. Do you wish to be in front of one that is being fired at you?
Like I said, people are the problem.
Logic is suspect.

[MDLNB]

It protected the children?


Yes, it protected at least 600 of them when the Border Patrol officer used his weapon to put the killer down.

You can use a gun against a killer with a gun, but it's kind of hard to use a bomb against a killer with a bomb. Not impossible, but really? Guns serve several purposes. It is not the gun's fault or the law abiding citizen if some nut case uses a gun to take out his frustration.

The problem is still blatantly the perpetrator, NOT the gun. Time to think realistically and work on a solvable problem, rather than trying to eliminate the instrument of the crime.

[MDLNB]

Actually, that would work if only the Police and the military had cartridge weapons. You could hunt, protect your home, and shoot targets with muzzleloaders. I would be happy with just a bow and arrow even.


You would be happy, but many others (millions) would not.

[jimjamuser]

I am not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but the NRA meeting being held in Orlando this week (I believe) is a GUN FREE ZONE

So why do you think that might be? If they believe guns are safe and everyone should have one, why not at their annual parade?
Yes, isn't that just a boatload of IRONY there!

[jebartle]

Sooooo, summary, guns kill people, no they don't, yes they do, no they don't, I say, if you see something, say something, lot of missed opportunities in Texas mass murders.

[MartinSE]

Yes, it protected at least 600 of them when the Border Patrol officer used his weapon to put the killer down.

You can use a gun against a killer with a gun, but it's kind of hard to use a bomb against a killer with a bomb. Not impossible, but really? Guns serve several purposes. It is not the gun's fault or the law abiding citizen if some nut case uses a gun to take out his frustration.

The problem is still blatantly the perpetrator, NOT the gun. Time to think realistically and work on a solvable problem, rather than trying to eliminate the instrument of the crime.

My post "It protected the children?" was in reference to THIS thread, not some random event some place. And NO 19 children are dead, they were not protected by the 2nd amendment, they were MURDERED by someone exercising it.

And someone asked earlier about the "guard" and why he didn't stop the shooter, the reason, it the shooter shot the guard first, lucky for the guard I think he survived.

[Eg_cruz]

Growing up see war movies and cowboy movies and we all carried pocket knives and cap pistols.

How come the older generation has not killed itself off?

Do not know the answer but taken guns from law abiding citizens is not it.
Because it was in our face 24 / 7. Social media video games are brutal. The kids and young adults that play video games get so involved with them they are becoming desensitized to what life really is, they don’t see life, they don’t value life the way we used to see and value life.
Movies today are nothing like yesterday. They tend to glorify the more you kill the big better the movie.
It is sad if people really don’t see the correlation of video games and Hollywood with these mass shootings

[MartinSE]

Because it was in our face 24 / 7. Social media video games are brutal. The kids and young adults that play video games get so involved with them they are becoming desensitized to what life really is, they don’t see life, they don’t value life the way we used to see and value life.
Movies today are nothing like yesterday. They tend to glorify the more you kill the big better the movie.
It is sad if people really don’t see the correlation of video games and Hollywood with these mass shootings

Social media and and video games exist around the world. So, nope not the cause. And btw, correlation does not equal causation. There is NO, ZERO, ZIP evidence that either CAUSE mass shootings.

[jimjamuser]

The above are just mass shootings from 1996 to 2021. We can see this happens in other countries, some with VERY strict gun laws.

Let's not pretend taking guns from law abiding citizens will change what terrorists, criminals, or nutjobs do.

At least in the US there is a good chance a good guy will stop the violence with his own firearm. Like the Border Patrol Agent did in Texas.
Any easily available comparisons of gun violence by world countries quickly show that the US is, BY FAR, the country with the biggest gun violence problem. WE are numero uno !

[davem4616]

so sad what our grandchildren and our children have to deal with today....

how did we ever get this far out of control?

[Sarah_W]

For over two hundreds years we have had total access to nearly every type of firearm and then Columbine in 1999; and many mass shootings since then. Our access to guns did not change. In other words, you could buy whatever you wanted. So what changed? The only portion of the equation that changed was the people. The access to the internet and the rise of social media has created a new generation of people with low morals and very poor social skills. The AR has been around for over 60 years. Now all of a sudden it is a problem.

People who believe the dogma that it's the gun, it's the gun, lack critical thinking skills and are easily manipulated by the media they watch. That is a major factor why this problem won't be solved.

Law abiding Americans will not voluntarily give up their guns. Forcing them to do so by law will end up with a repeat of 1776. The number of people who would die if such an event happened will make all mass shootings pale in comparison. Gun control fanatics are barking up the wrong tree.

The responsibility of maintaining our Freedom is up to each one of us. Even if you don't exercise your 2nd Amendment Right you should never surrender it. "When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty".

[jebartle]

Another possible cause, the pandemic made everyone NUTS!

[ThirdOfFive]

Back then there were no 30-round "banana clips" or kevlar vests readily available. Guns were for hunting animals NOT PEOPLE. Today IS VERY different from 1965!
You're wrong, I'm afraid.

AR-15 - style rifles (and large capacity 30-round clips), under the original Colt patent, have been sold to and were popular with American gun enthusiasts for well over 50 years. No less an authoritative source than NPR states this: "For more than a half-century, the AR-15 has been popular among gun owners, widely available in gun stores and, for many years, even appeared in the Sears catalog...." ("A Brief History of the AR-15", Greg Myre, NPR, February 28, 2018). Once the colt patent expired, other gun companies began manufacturing the AR-15 type as well. Remember--the type was designed to be sold to America's CIVILIAN population and they've been around for a long time and were quite popular well over a half-century ago.

But guns with large-capacity magazines have been around far longer than that. Keeping it to more-or-less recent history, following WW II hundreds of thousands of surplus M1 Carbines were sold to the public: many by the Federal Government itself at steeply discounted prices under the Civilian Marksmanship Program. They came with 20-round clips but even then, larger clips were available for purchase. I recall seeing the ads in The American Rifleman magazines: you could buy many surplus military rifles, not just the MI Carbine, for as little as $12.00, and as I recall the NRA as well as other retailers sold the large-capacity clips as well.

You may be thinking of the Federal Firearms Control Act, which banned large-capacity magazines (I believe any that held more than eleven rounds) but that was in effect for only 10 years, 1994 to 2004.

The fact of the matter is that semi-automatic rifles with large-capacity clips have been around since the middle of the last century, and were probably a whole lot more available to people then, than the AR-15 models are available for purchase now. But even with the easier access, things like Texas or Columbine just didn't happen then.

Face it. It's a people problem, NOT a gun problem. And until we fix the people, that won't change.

[Caymus]

Seems that the law enforcement response could have been better

MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/uvalde-police-officer-admits-cops-saved-their-own-kids-from-robb-elementary-before-stopping-shooter/ar-AAXLzkH?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2b9df69d5dc341b79c7c7b925cbce696)

[Scbang]

You're wrong, I'm afraid.

AR-15 - style rifles (and large capacity 30-round clips), under the original Colt patent, have been sold to and were popular with American gun enthusiasts for well over 50 years. No less an authoritative source than NPR states this: "For more than a half-century, the AR-15 has been popular among gun owners, widely available in gun stores and, for many years, even appeared in the Sears catalog...." ("A Brief History of the AR-15", Greg Myre, NPR, February 28, 2018). Once the colt patent expired, other gun companies began manufacturing the AR-15 type as well. Remember--the type was designed to be sold to America's CIVILIAN population and they've been around for a long time and were quite popular well over a half-century ago.

But guns with large-capacity magazines have been around far longer than that. Keeping it to more-or-less recent history, following WW II hundreds of thousands of surplus M1 Carbines were sold to the public: many by the Federal Government itself at steeply discounted prices under the Civilian Marksmanship Program. They came with 20-round clips but even then, larger clips were available for purchase. I recall seeing the ads in The American Rifleman magazines: you could buy many surplus military rifles, not just the MI Carbine, for as little as $12.00, and as I recall the NRA as well as other retailers sold the large-capacity clips as well.

You may be thinking of the Federal Firearms Control Act, which banned large-capacity magazines (I believe any that held more than eleven rounds) but that was in effect for only 10 years, 1994 to 2004.

The fact of the matter is that semi-automatic rifles with large-capacity clips have been around since the middle of the last century, and were probably a whole lot more available to people then, than the AR-15 models are available for purchase now. But even with the easier access, things like Texas or Columbine just didn't happen then.

Face it. It's a people problem, NOT a gun problem. And until we fix the people, that won't change.
If you remember the days when your company treated you like a family. Many of us joined a company thinking one day you will retire from the same company. There were office parties for your personal celebration and company picnics and yes, pensions for your long dedicated service. Some of us were actually happy to go to work spend time with your co-worker/friends. Then over the years the society changed, Business changed to pursuit of profits regardless of employee happiness. Remember the movie "Wallstreet"? Michael Douglas claimed "Greed is Good".
Now, happy people with guns should have no reason to become a mass murderer. But society changed. Opioid epidemic means killing more people means more profit. In this environment, we must change. We have to limit the availability of guns that can kill people so easily so fast. 2nd amendment yes but when Gov has F-35, what chances average citizens have to resist and win against them. Voting is one way but for guns, I think license/reg/insurance is the way to go to limit the availability.

Sadness

[jimjamuser]

I wondered why the Border Patrol was involved.
Probably just the closest available tactical unit. I heard the question asked about why was NOT the local Fire Station called in because they have BREECHING equipment to knock down doors?

[jimjamuser]

Not so sure availability of firearms is the cause. Understand there is a huge number of firearms owned by residents of the villages. When was the last time they were improperly used?
The Villages population is self-selected to be older and more stable than the average violent younger character throughout the whole US. That is not a good comparison. Rather, compare US violent gun crimes with ANY other country and the US death rate due to guns is GREATLY ahead of Spain, Germany, or any other country. Those charts are easy to find. Increased gun availability equates to greater gun death - it is pretty logical.

[jimjamuser]

The 2nd Ammendment is not about hunting or home protection.
It's about the people having the means to resist a tyranical government.

All "semi-automatic" means is the next bullet is loaded after the last is shot. A revolver loads the next bullet by trigger squeeze (or thumb cocking) and anyone with any skill can achieve the same rate of fire as an AR15. Besides, shooting fast means less accuracy, so it's a wash.

As for the New Zealand and Australia argument, they didn't have many mass shooting before confiscation. Australia did force people into quarantine detention during covid. They could because they did not fear an armed populace.

And the reason gun ownership is up is because people fear a tyranical government. When Seattle allowed a group of Communist thugs to take over the city, people bought guns. When those same Communist thugs laid seige to a Federal Courthouse in Portland, people bought guns.

I'm all for personal choice. If you don't like guns, don't buy one.
Australia did what was best for public health during a Covid surge. It is quite a stretch to relate that to how many armed citizens they have. And Australian citizens have plenty of guns - they are just bolt actions NOT semi-automatic. The slower bolt actions allow citizens time to fight back against mass murderers. Also, a limit on rounds in a clip to 5 would definitely slow down a mass murderer - 30 round banana clips are sick and used by inhumane COWARDS!!!!!!!!

[thevillages2013]

Maybe we should not let our children play violent video games that gives them the idea that it's ok to kill people ?

Excellent point. I’ve been saying that for two decades now. It’s a training device and when they lose touch with reality their instincts take over . Now there are virtual reality games

[jimjamuser]

Social media and and video games exist around the world. So, nope not the cause. And btw, correlation does not equal causation. There is NO, ZERO, ZIP evidence that either CAUSE mass shootings.
Agreed.

[ThirdOfFive]

The Villages population is self-selected to be older and more stable than the average violent younger character throughout the whole US. That is not a good comparison. Rather, compare US violent gun crimes with ANY other country and the US death rate due to guns is GREATLY ahead of Spain, Germany, or any other country. Those charts are easy to find. Increased gun availability equates to greater gun death - it is pretty logical.
Compare the gun deaths of any of America's largest inner cities, to the gun deaths in the surrounding suburbs and rural areas.

[Stu from NYC]

Compare the gun deaths of any of America's largest inner cities, to the gun deaths in the surrounding suburbs and rural areas.

Very true

[thevillages2013]

It’s amazing how most on this site repost the same old talking points from Fox noise and the far right gun nutz! The issue is very simple,,,,, stronger background checks- what we have now is lame and useless! Not one person in america needs to own an Assault rifle! NO ONE!. Not one person in America needs to own body armor! If any 18 year old child purchases an Assault rifle, body armor, and massive ammo,,,,RED FLAG folks!

If I want to own one it’s none of anyone’s business. Guns are guns . A damn 9mm will kill 30 people within two minutes or less so it’s not the gun it’s the ABSOLUTE NUT pulling the trigger

[jimjamuser]

For over two hundreds years we have had total access to nearly every type of firearm and then Columbine in 1999; and many mass shootings since then. Our access to guns did not change. In other words, you could buy whatever you wanted. So what changed? The only portion of the equation that changed was the people. The access to the internet and the rise of social media has created a new generation of people with low morals and very poor social skills. The AR has been around for over 60 years. Now all of a sudden it is a problem.

People who believe the dogma that it's the gun, it's the gun, lack critical thinking skills and are easily manipulated by the media they watch. That is a major factor why this problem won't be solved.

Law abiding Americans will not voluntarily give up their guns. Forcing them to do so by law will end up with a repeat of 1776. The number of people who would die if such an event happened will make all mass shootings pale in comparison. Gun control fanatics are barking up the wrong tree.

The responsibility of maintaining our Freedom is up to each one of us. Even if you don't exercise your 2nd Amendment Right you should never surrender it. "When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty".
For argument's sake let's say that I believed the theory that people in the US somehow (?) changed around 1999 into mass-murdering zombies. How does that explain away the fact that both Australia and New Zealand brought down mass murders to about zero after they had years of problems by concentrating on the GUN? They said NO semi-automatic rifles. They can have bolt actions. Then, why does the US have the MOST, by far, available GUNS and also the MOST gun violence in the world?
......... The GUN is the obvious factor for the US being # 1.

[Sarah_W]

For argument's sake let's say that I believed the theory that people in the US somehow (?) changed around 1999 into mass-murdering zombies. How does that explain away the fact that both Australia and New Zealand brought down mass murders to about zero after they had years of problems by concentrating on the GUN? They said NO semi-automatic rifles. They can have bolt actions. Then, why does the US have the MOST, by far, available GUNS and also the MOST gun violence in the world?
......... The GUN is the obvious factor for the US being # 1.

Jim, we are not talking about murderous zombies. We are talking about American citizens who, in the past 20 years, have gone on heinous shooting sprees targeting defenseless victims. The select gun free zones for maximum carnage. There is a very serious fault in their brain, not their trigger finger. It is very short sighted to think a cookie cutter approach will be effective, at any cost. That is your solution, at any cost restrict the Rights of hundreds of millions of people because of the actions of dozens. The leap you have to make to justify that is just bizarre.

I have a better solution. Since the problem is clearly a male problem how about if we just make it illegal for men to have guns. Women committing these heinous crimes are so rare it's safe to say the nation would be much safer if only women had access to guns.

[jimjamuser]

You're wrong, I'm afraid.

AR-15 - style rifles (and large capacity 30-round clips), under the original Colt patent, have been sold to and were popular with American gun enthusiasts for well over 50 years. No less an authoritative source than NPR states this: "For more than a half-century, the AR-15 has been popular among gun owners, widely available in gun stores and, for many years, even appeared in the Sears catalog...." ("A Brief History of the AR-15", Greg Myre, NPR, February 28, 2018). Once the colt patent expired, other gun companies began manufacturing the AR-15 type as well. Remember--the type was designed to be sold to America's CIVILIAN population and they've been around for a long time and were quite popular well over a half-century ago.

But guns with large-capacity magazines have been around far longer than that. Keeping it to more-or-less recent history, following WW II hundreds of thousands of surplus M1 Carbines were sold to the public: many by the Federal Government itself at steeply discounted prices under the Civilian Marksmanship Program. They came with 20-round clips but even then, larger clips were available for purchase. I recall seeing the ads in The American Rifleman magazines: you could buy many surplus military rifles, not just the MI Carbine, for as little as $12.00, and as I recall the NRA as well as other retailers sold the large-capacity clips as well.

You may be thinking of the Federal Firearms Control Act, which banned large-capacity magazines (I believe any that held more than eleven rounds) but that was in effect for only 10 years, 1994 to 2004.

The fact of the matter is that semi-automatic rifles with large-capacity clips have been around since the middle of the last century, and were probably a whole lot more available to people then, than the AR-15 models are available for purchase now. But even with the easier access, things like Texas or Columbine just didn't happen then.

Face it. It's a people problem, NOT a gun problem. And until we fix the people, that won't change.
That is a nice explanation of the history of guns from 1950 to say 1999. But after that, things started to evolve from hunting guns to man-killing semi-auto military-style guns. Man-killing guns made more profits for the gun makers. Both mental illness and violent movies or games are the same worldwide. The US is by far the outlier among all countries because it has, by far, the most mass murders. So, what is the reason for this? The only FACTOR left is that the US has the most, BY FAR, available semi-auto military-style rifles - the weapon of choice for mass murderers.

[jimjamuser]

If you remember the days when your company treated you like a family. Many of us joined a company thinking one day you will retire from the same company. There were office parties for your personal celebration and company picnics and yes, pensions for your long dedicated service. Some of us were actually happy to go to work spend time with your co-worker/friends. Then over the years the society changed, Business changed to pursuit of profits regardless of employee happiness. Remember the movie "Wallstreet"? Michael Douglas claimed "Greed is Good".
Now, happy people with guns should have no reason to become a mass murderer. But society changed. Opioid epidemic means killing more people means more profit. In this environment, we must change. We have to limit the availability of guns that can kill people so easily so fast. 2nd amendment yes but when Gov has F-35, what chances average citizens have to resist and win against them. Voting is one way but for guns, I think license/reg/insurance is the way to go to limit the availability.

Sadness
The movie about "Greed is Good" was like a turning point in America. Today "the Handmaid's Tale" seems like another turning point. The increasing quantity of guns (and type) in the last 2 years may be a bad premonition of things to come.

[Nucky]

A lifetime ago I had a business relationship with the Board of Education in Paterson N.J. During this time I had many conversations while providing a service to some machinery in all of the schools. I was speaking to a man named Joe Clark. We became friends. I'm not certain what his job was when I met him but I sure did know it a few years later.

The summer that they filmed the movie in East Side H.S. they spray painted the walls, threw garbage on the floor, and exaggerated how dirty the place really was. I guess that was just Hollywood putting their flavor on the site.

This man singlehandedly took on many members of the Board of Education in Paterson who seemed to work against him as he tried to prevent drug dealers from walking the hallways, going into classrooms, and having free run of the school he was put in charge of. He chained the doors and locked the doors with chains and locks you couldn't buy at Rickels. He took the money from his own pocket. He cared about the kids and teachers in the school and wanted to provide a safe environment for them to be able to learn. Unfortunately, the kids came from the hood. Many looked to Mr. Clark as a father figure. He did his best to speak in the auditorium to the kids about avoiding the temptation that was all around them. He spoke of teenage pregnancy and the down side of what comes with it.

He was making great progress and was making some of the higher-ups look bad. He had the recipe. He was snuffed out before he could complete his mission. He changed many people's lives for the better. He cried like a little girl the day that someone was raped in the stair case in the school. He didn't give up, he doubled up his efforts. He was the kind of leader that we need now who puts the children before everything else. What a great guy he was. I just looked at Wikipedia and see that he died a few years ago here in Florida.

I wonder what he would have done under the present conditions? I'll bet talking about everything would be low on his list and action would be on top.

I have no words for what's going on in these schools now. NOTHING I say will help or be constructive. We need a miracle to turn things around. We need someone like Joe Clark to come to the rescue. Many people thought he was nuts, he was a great man who motivated the un-motivateable and broke the chain of failure and abuse in many families in Paterson N.J. Hey Joe, send your replacement quickly, we're in deep trouble.

He was really something else with that megaphone. What a memory all this is for me. I think I'll go cry like a little girl for a little bit.

[jimjamuser]

Compare the gun deaths of any of America's largest inner cities, to the gun deaths in the surrounding suburbs and rural areas.
Yes, and next I should compare 5 apples to 7 oranges.

[Djean1981]

It's cultural. No God in schools and no daddy at home. Social media and device addiction. This is the result. Narcissists willing to kill for attention..

[jimjamuser]

Jim, we are not talking about murderous zombies. We are talking about American citizens who, in the past 20 years, have gone on heinous shooting sprees targeting defenseless victims. The select gun free zones for maximum carnage. There is a very serious fault in their brain, not their trigger finger. It is very short sighted to think a cookie cutter approach will be effective, at any cost. That is your solution, at any cost restrict the Rights of hundreds of millions of people because of the actions of dozens. The leap you have to make to justify that is just bizarre.

I have a better solution. Since the problem is clearly a male problem how about if we just make it illegal for men to have guns. Women committing these heinous crimes are so rare it's safe to say the nation would be much safer if only women had access to guns.
You have a very convincing style of writing, very confident. I am truly impressed. I would love to have a country where only women could own guns because it is based on a STATISTICAL FACT - and would be a real solution - I would even vote for it if it was on a referendum bill. My opinion IS also based on a STATISTICAL FACT.......that we are an outlier amount all countries of the world and # 1 in mass murders and gun deaths. It JUST CAN'T be some COINCIDENCE that we ALSO have the MOST availability of guns in the world.
.........And I would also say that the genesis of the problem was when the Gun Manufacturers and their propaganda machine AKA the NRA decided that "GREED IS GOOD"..........around 1999

[jimjamuser]

Jim, we are not talking about murderous zombies. We are talking about American citizens who, in the past 20 years, have gone on heinous shooting sprees targeting defenseless victims. The select gun free zones for maximum carnage. There is a very serious fault in their brain, not their trigger finger. It is very short sighted to think a cookie cutter approach will be effective, at any cost. That is your solution, at any cost restrict the Rights of hundreds of millions of people because of the actions of dozens. The leap you have to make to justify that is just bizarre.

I have a better solution. Since the problem is clearly a male problem how about if we just make it illegal for men to have guns. Women committing these heinous crimes are so rare it's safe to say the nation would be much safer if only women had access to guns.
And Sarah, I must confess that I thought murderous ZOMBIES was quite clever of me!

[jimjamuser]

It's cultural. No God in schools and no daddy at home. Social media and device addiction. This is the result. Narcissists willing to kill for attention..
Gods and daddies sing the same sad song.

[Sarah_W]

And Sarah, I must confess that I thought murderous ZOMBIES was quite clever of me!

Okay, I'll give you that one. I will also confess I've used the term Zombies to describe the population of Los Angeles when I lived 40 miles north.

America is not a perfect nation. None are. We are also an outlier for the freedom and the opportunities that we enjoy simply by birthright. Millions of people are very committed to coming to our country legally as well as illegally. Why, they are seeking opportunity that can't get in their home country.

We have complex problems that require complex solutions. There is no easy way to solve these mass shootings. We begin by truly trying to solve it rather than settling for knee jerk reactions that will not be successful nor sustainable.

[Topspinmo]

Social media and and video games exist around the world. So, nope not the cause. And btw, correlation does not equal causation. There is NO, ZERO, ZIP evidence that either CAUSE mass shootings.

You’re opinion that’s it.

[Topspinmo]

Any easily available comparisons of gun violence by world countries quickly show that the US is, BY FAR, the country with the biggest gun violence problem. WE are numero uno !


And Mexico don’t have fun violence problem

[Topspinmo]

That boat has sailed. Your generation refuses to accept responsibility for the lousy teaching of the generation that actually raised today's kids. If only those kids' parents had better role models (their own parents) then maybe the grandkids wouldn't be so rotten today.

You want to fix the family, then stop telling kids it's okay to carry around AR-15s.

Clueless nobody tells there kids it’s ok to pack AR-15.

[zendog3]

No gun safety laws will be passed.No law will limit assault rifles with high capacity magazines. So what can be done? This is legislation that our conservative legislators will support:
1. Quit wasting energy trying to increase gun safety.
2. Realize the NRA is right. The only protection against a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun.
3. Pass a law requiring every school teacher to carry a loaded automatic pistol anytime he or she is near children.
4. Children under 14 should probably not carry guns, but 15 and older should be required to carry guns while in school to protect themselves.
5. Halls in schools should have glass boxes every 50 yards with a loaded gun inside and a sing that says 'IN CASE OF ACTIVE SHOOTER, BREAK GLASS AND SHOOT INTRUDER.
These laws would stop school shootings! Who would be stupid enough to attack a school if they knew everyone in the place was armed? These common-sense laws would also eliminate bullying. No one wold bully another, if the knew the bullied person had easy access to a deadly weapon.
Widespread gun ownership would also stop road rage. If someone cuts me off, I am unlikely to assail him at the next stop sign if I know he is packing heat.

[Stu from NYC]

A lifetime ago I had a business relationship with the Board of Education in Paterson N.J. During this time I had many conversations while providing a service to some machinery in all of the schools. I was speaking to a man named Joe Clark. We became friends. I'm not certain what his job was when I met him but I sure did know it a few years later.

The summer that they filmed the movie in East Side H.S. they spray painted the walls, threw garbage on the floor, and exaggerated how dirty the place really was. I guess that was just Hollywood putting their flavor on the site.

This man singlehandedly took on many members of the Board of Education in Paterson who seemed to work against him as he tried to prevent drug dealers from walking the hallways, going into classrooms, and having free run of the school he was put in charge of. He chained the doors and locked the doors with chains and locks you couldn't buy at Rickels. He took the money from his own pocket. He cared about the kids and teachers in the school and wanted to provide a safe environment for them to be able to learn. Unfortunately, the kids came from the hood. Many looked to Mr. Clark as a father figure. He did his best to speak in the auditorium to the kids about avoiding the temptation that was all around them. He spoke of teenage pregnancy and the down side of what comes with it.

He was making great progress and was making some of the higher-ups look bad. He had the recipe. He was snuffed out before he could complete his mission. He changed many people's lives for the better. He cried like a little girl the day that someone was raped in the stair case in the school. He didn't give up, he doubled up his efforts. He was the kind of leader that we need now who puts the children before everything else. What a great guy he was. I just looked at Wikipedia and see that he died a few years ago here in Florida.

I wonder what he would have done under the present conditions? I'll bet talking about everything would be low on his list and action would be on top.

I have no words for what's going on in these schools now. NOTHING I say will help or be constructive. We need a miracle to turn things around. We need someone like Joe Clark to come to the rescue. Many people thought he was nuts, he was a great man who motivated the un-motivateable and broke the chain of failure and abuse in many families in Paterson N.J. Hey Joe, send your replacement quickly, we're in deep trouble.

He was really something else with that megaphone. What a memory all this is for me. I think I'll go cry like a little girl for a little bit.

I remember him from many years ago living in NYC. Man was a hero and such an inspiration.

[Scbang]

If I want to own one it’s none of anyone’s business. Guns are guns . A damn 9mm will kill 30 people within two minutes or less so it’s not the gun it’s the ABSOLUTE NUT pulling the trigger

If the NUT can not have gun, he can not pull the trigger.

Sad

[mtdjed]

I am a conservative and believe that people should be able to legally own guns. But certainly, there is a limit. If a new gun came out that cost next to nothing and could shoot accurately 200 rounds per minute that allowed quick clip exchange, would it be wise to let anybody have? What if technology changes allow a deadly laser beam with unlimited range and repetition and not requiring reload?

There are a lot of wackos out there that may be unrestrained and use it to kill thousands even though the rest of us claim restraint. Is a wacko someone who should be able to buy this at age 18? How about a Glock 19 with a 15-round magazine plus fast clip change? I look at my Glock as protection from insurrection. I legally bought it as my first gun. Who knew my intent?

And who in their right mind expands law officers to immediately rush into a school with the immediate attempt to take out a wacko with unlimited fire power. Any of us willing to do that? Almost all military and civilian attempts to quell such situations would require a plan.

Wackos of the past did at least have technology limitation, but the future has no limit.

Also, no place for Wackos anymore. "Too cruel to put them away."

[MartinSE]

I am a conservative and believe that people should be able to legally own guns. But certainly, there is a limit. If a new gun came out that cost next to nothing and could shoot accurately 200 rounds per minute that allowed quick clip exchange, would it be wise to let anybody have? What if technology changes allow a deadly laser beam with unlimited range and repetition and not requiring reload?

There are a lot of wackos out there that may be unrestrained and use it to kill thousands even though the rest of us claim restraint. Is a wacko someone who should be able to buy this at age 18? How about a Glock 19 with a 15-round magazine plus fast clip change? I look at my Glock as protection from insurrection. I legally bought it as my first gun. Who knew my intent?

And who in their right mind expands law officers to immediately rush into a school with the immediate attempt to take out a wacko with unlimited fire power. Any of us willing to do that? Almost all military and civilian attempts to quell such situations would require a plan.

Wackos of the past did at least have technology limitation, but the future has no limit.

Also, no place for Wackos anymore. "Too cruel to put them away."

I am a liberal, obviously, and I agree with almost every thing you said.

Well said.

[Worldseries27]

no gun safety laws will be passed.no law will limit assault rifles with high capacity magazines. So what can be done? This is legislation that our conservative legislators will support:
1. Quit wasting energy trying to increase gun safety.
2. Realize the nra is right. The only protection against a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun.
3. Pass a law requiring every school teacher to carry a loaded automatic pistol anytime he or she is near children.
4. Children under 14 should probably not carry guns, but 15 and older should be required to carry guns while in school to protect themselves.
5. Halls in schools should have glass boxes every 50 yards with a loaded gun inside and a sing that says 'in case of active shooter, break glass and shoot intruder.
These laws would stop school shootings! Who would be stupid enough to attack a school if they knew everyone in the place was armed? These common-sense laws would also eliminate bullying. No one wold bully another, if the knew the bullied person had easy access to a deadly weapon.
Widespread gun ownership would also stop road rage. If someone cuts me off, i am unlikely to assail him at the next stop sign if i know he is packing heat.
i suggested in previous posts that the duty of protecting our children should belong to each of the 50 states national guardsmen as outlined in the second amendment to the bill of rights.
They are already on the payroll and are fully trained in the weaponry they use. 2 guardsmen per school using metal detectors and one centralized entrance should suffice and succeed.
No supreme court battles to fight. No us vs. Them. Let's put the children first because if we don't then were putting them last.

[jimbomaybe]

I am a liberal, obviously, and I agree with almost every thing you said.

Well said.
But would agree with the policies on treatment of individuals with mental problems and the criminals laws of the past that kept a lid on this sort of carnage ?

[Trayderjoe]

So 22 pages on this thread later, the same old same old is regurgitated. What is the problem that is trying to be solved here? School shootings? Ok, if that is the only problem that will stop children from being slaughtered in schools, then you must take away ALL guns, not just semi-automatics. You can't argue that bolt action rifles are ok since children are just as dead when shot with a bolt action rifle. You even get the benefit of ending shootings in major urban areas if no one can have a gun. Or does shooting children/people only matter when it is a mass shooting event?

LET"S DO IT!

Now what? Now what?

Do we wait for the next mass murder of children to take away THAT tool, or should we be proactive? What tool? How about a car? Oh my, cars are not designed to kill, nope can't take them away. Hmmmm....so if evil, or someone with mental issues decides that they can kill as many children by ramming them down with a car in the playground, is that going to be ok? While this did not happen on a playground, a "mass killing" event recently happened using a car. Remember Darrell Brooks? If you don't remember him, he was the person arrested for the Waukesha Christmas Parade tragedy (link). How about the suicidal person who decides to load up a car with fertilizer as part of a bomb and decides to take out a school bus?

So go ahead, focus on the tool currently used and take away guns. Do you really think that will stop someone who is bent on murder from finding another way to kill?

Or how about narrowing the focus and finding out WHY and what we can do better to reduce the WHY? More laws aren't the answer if existing laws don't work. WHY don't they work? WHY do the rights of people who need mental help supersede the rights of children to live?

Everyday we do risk analysis. When you get in a car, fly on a plane, EVEN TAKING prescription medicine you assess the risk and either accept it or not. Face it, living REQUIRES risk, it is impossible to eliminate all risk.

[jswirs]

jim, we are not talking about murderous zombies. We are talking about american citizens who, in the past 20 years, have gone on heinous shooting sprees targeting defenseless victims. The select gun free zones for maximum carnage. There is a very serious fault in their brain, not their trigger finger. It is very short sighted to think a cookie cutter approach will be effective, at any cost. That is your solution, at any cost restrict the rights of hundreds of millions of people because of the actions of dozens. The leap you have to make to justify that is just bizarre.

i have a better solution. Since the problem is clearly a male problem how about if we just make it illegal for men to have guns. Women committing these heinous crimes are so rare it's safe to say the nation would be much safer if only women had access to guns.
Sarah W - That is so very true. When I read what is highlighted, I said to my wife, "You gotta' love this woman".
Also, not that it matters, but I think the term "clip" which I have seen in some of these post, is being incorrectly used. I believe the proper term is "magazine".

[noslices1]

I have not heard of any of these shootings being done by NRA members. Maybe only NRA members should be allowed to own guns.

[MartinSE]

i suggested in previous posts that the duty of protecting our children should belong to each of the 50 states national guardsmen as outlined in the second amendment to the bill of rights.
They are already on the payroll and are fully trained in the weaponry they use. 2 guardsmen per school using metal detectors and one centralized entrance should suffice and succeed.
No supreme court battles to fight. No us vs. Them. Let's put the children first because if we don't then were putting them last.

The school system had it's own TRAINED police force. The only problem was none of them had any experience (how do you get experience the first time?) So, many things went wrong. Lots of witnesses are coming forward and contradicting Abbots "claims" about how it went down. Even to the point a 9 year old that lived told the story of the police, once they went in, were calling out to have the kids let them know where they were, and one little girl stood up and yelled "HELP". so, they shooter shot her.

[MDLNB]

If restricting gun ownership is the answer to gun violence, why is it that the states/cities with the strictest gun control laws have the highest gun related violence? Does anyone REALLY think that by eliminating gun sales to honest, decent citizens we are going to eliminate gun related violence? Does making marijuana illegal actually keep folks from obtaining marijuana? Yes, decent law abiding folks will not have guns, but is that what you really want? I don't know the stats on gun ownership to gun crime, but I would suggest that over all, it has to be pretty low. If there really is over 300 million guns owned in America, then the gun crime to gun ownership is pretty low. So, do we penalize decent folks because of a very minute amount of lawlessness related to possession of guns? How about we ban automobiles because a very few car owners drive under the influence? Take all cars away from decent folks. How about banning all alcohol sales because a very few abusers drive under the influence? Oh yeah, that was tried already and how did that work? Maybe we should make laws that prohibit murder....oh...right....done that.
Now, we get to the common argument that will undoubtedly come up (as always) about rate of fire. "Oh, but a semiautomatic firearm can kill lots of people." Yep, but so can a bomb, so can poisonous gas, and so can a truck or car. Do we penalize the majority for the actions of the minority? Like someone else said, how many murders by firearm in the Villages?
Take away the cause, not the method.

[Sarah_W]

[/color][/u][/i][/b]
Sarah W - That is so very true. When I read what is highlighted, I said to my wife, "You gotta' love this woman".
Also, not that it matters, but I think the term "clip" which I have seen in some of these post, is being incorrectly used. I believe the proper term is "magazine".

Thank you, Yes you are correct. The AR uses magazines, not clips. Many rifles, especially modern types use magazines. I think of it as a "box" that gets inserted into the action of the rifle. Clips are thin and not a box. I've shot WWII rifles that used a clip. Moon clips allow a revolver to shoot 9mm and speed load. There may be other types.

[aldeana]

Isn't it hypocritical and ironic that no guns will be allowed at the NRA event this week? Don't you wish that those precautions were in place at every supermarket, church, movie theater, etc?
How about those privileged few (mostly big name politicians) who walk around with a security detail?


Prayers, platitudes, lots of flowers, plenty of photo ops. at the vigils, (cry please) and most of all, empty promises.
Same old faces spouting the same entrenched opinions.
Sells papers, and keeps the talking heads employed.
Nothing will change.
Here's to the next time! :ohdear:

[Dantes]

Yes that will work just like the cars that kill people

[MartinSE]

So 22 pages on this thread later, the same old same old is regurgitated. What is the problem that is trying to be solved here? School shootings? Ok, if that is the only problem that will stop children from being slaughtered in schools, then you must take away ALL guns, not just semi-automatics. You can't argue that bolt action rifles are ok since children are just as dead when shot with a bolt action rifle. You even get the benefit of ending shootings in major urban areas if no one can have a gun. Or does shooting children/people only matter when it is a mass shooting event?

LET"S DO IT!

Now what? Now what?

Do we wait for the next mass murder of children to take away THAT tool, or should we be proactive? What tool? How about a car? Oh my, cars are not designed to kill, nope can't take them away. Hmmmm....so if evil, or someone with mental issues decides that they can kill as many children by ramming them down with a car in the playground, is that going to be ok? While this did not happen on a playground, a "mass killing" event recently happened using a car. Remember Darrell Brooks? If you don't remember him, he was the person arrested for the Waukesha Christmas Parade tragedy (link). How about the suicidal person who decides to load up a car with fertilizer as part of a bomb and decides to take out a school bus?

So go ahead, focus on the tool currently used and take away guns. Do you really think that will stop someone who is bent on murder from finding another way to kill?

Or how about narrowing the focus and finding out WHY and what we can do better to reduce the WHY? More laws aren't the answer if existing laws don't work. WHY don't they work? WHY do the rights of people who need mental help supersede the rights of children to live?

Everyday we do risk analysis. When you get in a car, fly on a plane, EVEN TAKING prescription medicine you assess the risk and either accept it or not. Face it, living REQUIRES risk, it is impossible to eliminate all risk.

Back and forth.

It is obvious that we can't TAKE AWAY ALL THE GUNS. So, even suggesting it is just being intentionally confrontational.

We can at least attempt to control the access. We can make some attempt to keep guns in the hands of responsible gun owners.

It is harder to get a drivers license in many states than it is to get as many guns as you want. In Texas the criteria seems to be, you are 18, breathing, have a load of money to spend, and no "known" criminal background involving shooting kids in schools.

Over and over people are saying, things that WONT work.

But, few or none are making suggestions of what might help. Just HELP - not perfect, not a solution. Every single person here that has explained in great detail why the things that are being proposes won't work, and not offering solutions themselves, are telling the parents "sucks to be you, we can't stop the murdering of your children".

[MartinSE]

Yes that will work just like the cars that kill people

How many cars have been used to murder children in their classrooms at school?

I wait while you look up the answer since you seem to think this post will contribute to saving children lives.

It seems almost every week another shooting kills more kids, and what do we have to offer as a sign to the parents that we care at all? Sarcasm? Children are dying. They are being murdered. Can we please argue about the color of peoples skin, or the cause of poverty, or wars, or stupid politicians, and for the sake of our children TRY to find something that will HELP. Not SOVLE, just help.

The greatest country on earth and we can't even set aside politics long enough to TRY and find a way to reduce the number of kids being murdered.

[chuckpedrey]

The Judge is on His throne and we will all stand before Him one day. Things would be a whole lot different if the Holy Bible were once again used as a text book in our school rooms.

[biker1]

Parochial schools notwithstanding, I don’t recall the Bible being used as a text book in schools but I am only in my mid 60s.



The Judge is on His throne and we will all stand before Him one day. Things would be a whole lot different if the Holy Bible were once again used as a text book in our school rooms.

[MartinSE]

But would agree with the policies on treatment of individuals with mental problems and the criminals laws of the past that kept a lid on this sort of carnage ?

I am for Americans coming together and finding things to try to reduce this problem. If we just enact things that reduce the deaths by 10% each year. Every year, one more thing, in ten years we would have solved the problem. But, we are now 20 years into this, since Columbine, and every single step is a fight. American's arguing about taking away cars and fertilizer instead of making productive suggestions on things that might help. Instead it seems that if. solution isn't perfect. If you can't guarantee it will stop 100% of the murders and not affect anyones access to guns - then the children's lives are not worth even trying.

[MartinSE]

The Judge is on His throne and we will all stand before Him one day. Things would be a whole lot different if the Holy Bible were once again used as a text book in our school rooms.

Whose bible do you think we should use for indoctrinating our children? And lets not talk about the awesome success of Theocracies in solving violence - does the inquisition, or the Crusades bring anything to mind? Mass murdering and torture.

If you want to practice religious beliefs, I am 100% in favor of that If you want to force me and my children to practice YOUR religious beliefs - how is that freedom of speech? How is that freedom of Religion?

The problem is MAN MADE, and the solution will be MAN MADE.

[waterflower]

defund the C I A
Investigate the psychotropic drugs the mass shooters are taking.

[YeOldeCurmudgeon]

Almost correct.

Hunters in Japan can have guns.

The low murder rate is culture driven, not gun control driven.

That's your opinion. The facts show that the less guns, the less gun-related deaths.

[Bay Kid]

Chicken. Put police back in schools.

[PugMom]

But would agree with the policies on treatment of individuals with mental problems and the criminals laws of the past that kept a lid on this sort of carnage ?

no, but that's a whole other can of worms. the cruelty involved in these sanitariums were inhumane, certainly, but the solution to simply release them is insane. if this is how things are in the US today, the ONLY thing that will stop this is security. no unauthorized personnel allowed with verification. we had to do it @ my kid's high school, was no big thing. you ring a bell, the camera sees who you are, & office staff buzz you in. not perfect, but it was a start

[jimbomaybe]

I am for Americans coming together and finding things to try to reduce this problem. If we just enact things that reduce the deaths by 10% each year. Every year, one more thing, in then years we would have solved the problem. But, we are now 20 years into this, since Columbine, and every single step is a fight. American's arguing about taking about cars and fertilizer instead of making productive suggestions on things that might help. Instead it seems that if. solution isn't perfect. If you can't guarantee it will stop 100% of the murders and not affect anyones access to guns - then the children's lives are not worth even trying.
Not sure I saw an answer to my question ? We should come together and turn the clock back regarding criminal justice and how mental problems are dealt with to the point where these things were just about unheard of ? and access to weapons was , at least by todays standards, very easy ?

[PugMom]

How many cars have many used to murder children in their classrooms at school?

I wait while you look up the answer since you seem to think this post will contribute to saving children lives.

It seems almost every week another shooting kills more kids, and what do we have to offer as a sign to the parents that we care at all? Sarcasm? Children are dying. They are being murdered. Can we please argue about the color of peoples skin, or the cause of poverty, or wars, or stupid politicians, and for the sake of our children TRY to find something that will HELP. Not SOVLE, just help.

The greatest country on earth and we can't even set aside politics long enough to TRY and find a way to reduce the number of kids being murdered.

well, maybe not @ school, but there's been reports of nut cases plowing thru pedestrians, wasn't 1 in wisconsin @ some sort of holiday celebration? then some other crazy guy in times square. again, i insist security is the answer. we simply must stop crazy people with guns from accessing schools

[PugMom]

an added thought: what about the case of sandy hook? the kid was obvious unbalanced just by looking @ him, but his mother bought them for him, as gifts, yet! how do we begin to control THAT? she even took him target shooting!

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Texas lawmen, Big hats, Big boots, Big swagger , Big nothing, they had to wait till they had an army , when as soon as the first law men on the grounds should have been banging at that door not waiting for help

[PugMom]

Texas lawmen, Big hats, Big boots, Big swagger , Big nothing, they had to wait till they had an army , when as soon as the first law men on the grounds should have been banging at that door not waiting for help

from your lips to God's ear! where's harry callahan when you need him?

[ThirdOfFive]

For argument's sake let's say that I believed the theory that people in the US somehow (?) changed around 1999 into mass-murdering zombies. How does that explain away the fact that both Australia and New Zealand brought down mass murders to about zero after they had years of problems by concentrating on the GUN? They said NO semi-automatic rifles. They can have bolt actions. Then, why does the US have the MOST, by far, available GUNS and also the MOST gun violence in the world?
......... The GUN is the obvious factor for the US being # 1.
"Those who give up a little freedom for a little security shall lose both--and deserve neither". (Benjamin Franklin--allegedly)

[MartinSE]

Chicken. Put police back in schools.

There was an officer there. The school district even has it's own trained in school shootings police force. It didn't work. The city police were 3 minutes away from the school, and took 15 MINUTES to get to the school. They then waited 45 more minutes to go inside, while children were being murdered.

Meanwhile the police stood outside the school for an HOUR, arguing with parents that were begging them to go in and save their children. One woman even had to be handcuffed to prevent her from trying herself, since the police weren't doing anything.

The official story coming out would make you think everything went according to plan, that did not happen.

[Caymus]

Texas lawmen, Big hats, Big boots, Big swagger , Big nothing, they had to wait till they had an army , when as soon as the first law men on the grounds should have been banging at that door not waiting for help

If you believe the article, some went in early to rescue their own kids.

MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/uvalde-police-officer-admits-cops-saved-their-own-kids-from-robb-elementary-before-stopping-shooter/ar-AAXLzkH?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2b9df69d5dc341b79c7c7b925cbce696)

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

There job was to stop the shooter

[Trayderjoe]

Back and forth.

It is obvious that we can't TAKE AWAY ALL THE GUNS. So, even suggesting it is just being intentionally confrontational.

Do you really think that I believe that you can, or should take away all guns? As I previously posted, people are comparing apples to pears. The mantra continues to be more gun control and those who question more gun control are not looking for solutions.

We can at least attempt to control the access. We can make some attempt to keep guns in the hands of responsible gun owners.

Given all of the information coming out about the murderer of these children, if he was FLAGGED for mental health issues in the FBI database as he should have been, he would not have passed the background check that the FBI approved. He would therefore not have been able to purchase the two rifles legally. This is one example of system failure. How about fixing what is broke and then determine what is needed to close identified gaps?

It is harder to get a drivers license in many states than it is to get as many guns as you want. In Texas the criteria seems to be, you are 18, breathing, have a load of money to spend, and no "known" criminal background involving shooting kids in schools.

Please provide proof "that it is easier to get a gun in many states" than a drivers license.

Over and over people are saying, things that WONT work.

But, few or none are making suggestions of what might help. Just HELP - not perfect, not a solution. Every single person here that has explained in great detail why the things that are being proposes won't work, and not offering solutions themselves, are telling the parents "sucks to be you, we can't stop the murdering of your children".

As I have said multiple times before, if you want to make progress then focus on the why and try and fix it. The problem with looking at the why is that it is not going to change anything in the short term. When the "quick fixes" ultimately don't work, how many of those people who proposed/supported them will be willing to look into the eyes of survivors of future mass killings and explain how their promised fixes didn't work?

[MartinSE]

"Those who give up a little freedom for a little security shall lose both--and deserve neither". (Benjamin Franklin--allegedly)

By that definition the only free person is an anarchist.

Do you stop at stop signs? Why?
Do you drive on the right side of the road? Why?
Do you not use an outhouse in the city? Why?
Do you not rob banks? Why?

The list of "freedoms" we give up in the name of being civilized is almost endless. So, I say that is a wonderful sounding sound bite, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with real life.

I also make the assumption that the "freedoms" you don't want to give up, are not the same as the ones I don't want to give up, but my freedoms are not as important as yours.

[ldj1938]

Guns do not shot themselves...

[veraina2006]

Prayers for the families.

[dewilson58]

Prayers for the families.

Absolutely.

Hopefully they have a strong faith.

[dewilson58]

Guns do not shot themselves...

Only in Hollywood.

[dewilson58]

That's your opinion.

Do some research and educate yourself.
Many studies have been done about Japan.
:ho:

[chuckpedrey]

The Bible was the primary text book in colonial times and Fisher Ames, who helped frame the Bill of Rights addressed the issue in an article titled “School Books”.

[Topspinmo]

Isn't it hypocritical and ironic that no guns will be allowed at the NRA event this week? Don't you wish that those precautions were in place at every supermarket, church, movie theater, etc?
How about those privileged few (mostly big name politicians) who walk around with a security detail?

Maybe there members follow rules.. some crazies in public don’t.

[Trayderjoe]

How many cars have been used to murder children in their classrooms at school?

I wait while you look up the answer since you seem to think this post will contribute to saving children lives.

It seems almost every week another shooting kills more kids, and what do we have to offer as a sign to the parents that we care at all? Sarcasm? Children are dying. They are being murdered. Can we please argue about the color of peoples skin, or the cause of poverty, or wars, or stupid politicians, and for the sake of our children TRY to find something that will HELP. Not SOVLE, just help.

The greatest country on earth and we can't even set aside politics long enough to TRY and find a way to reduce the number of kids being murdered.

Yes, children in a classroom have been killed by a car, so you can stop waiting. Here is a link (https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/driver-was-accelerating-when-car-hit-classroom-killing-two-children-court-told-20210903-p58olz.html) to the story. Granted it was an accident, but if an accident can happen that kills children in a classroom, can you deny that a deliberate attempt could have the same result? Oh and let's not forget the children that have been mowed down by a car. Don't believe me? Here is the most recent example, and by most recent, I mean YESTERDAY(link (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-intentionally-rammed-car-into-children-as-they-walked-to-school-d-a-says/ar-AAXLvJW)). Also note that the car contained multiple incendiary devices. Note too that a school staff member denied him access to the school 'to use the restroom" (Way to go by that staff member!). So did the car do it, or did the monster driving the car do it? The POINT is that if someone evil or mentally deranged wants to kill they will. So STOP focusing on guns and START focusing on why these animals do what they do.!

[Topspinmo]

Social media and and video games exist around the world. So, nope not the cause. And btw, correlation does not equal causation. There is NO, ZERO, ZIP evidence that either CAUSE mass shootings.

Please quote that. Or it’s just you’re opinion from the opinion piece you read it from.

[jimbomaybe]

By that definition the only free person is an anarchist.

Do you stop at stop signs? Why?
Do you drive on the right side of the road? Why?
Do you not use an outhouse in the city? Why?
Do you not rob banks? Why?

The list of "freedoms" we give up in the name of being civilized is almost endless. So, I say that is a wonderful sounding sound bite, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with real life.

I also make the assumption that the "freedoms" you don't want to give up, are not the same as the ones I don't want to give up, but my freedoms are not as important as yours.

It doesn't have anything to do with real life,, until it does, perhaps your ability to post/respond should be terminated, they are too discordant, inflammatory inciting to others, The ministry of truth will sort out your postings, remember the proposed "Fairness Act" will the ministry of State Security have to "interview " you? The problems we now face were not a problem previously , fifty years before Columbine it happened that some armed robbery teams would carry unloaded weapons, if one member killed somebody Everyone involved had a date with Sparkey, appeals did not take years , unless you had a very good reason they just were not heard. it was a matter of "personnel responsibility " people haven changed, our enlighten manner of dealing with problems has

[dewilson58]

Please quote that. Or it’s just you’re opinion from the opinion piece you read it from.

Actually he/she might be able to produce a quote.
There have been studies with results on both sides of the issue.
Depending on what "expert", there is a link, there is not a link.
:shrug:

:mornincoffee:

[Diverdave]

19 innocent children, 2 dedicated teachers, lives lost, solution????? More guns, bigger prisons, NOT. Japan, no guns unless police and military, murder rate .3 percent per 100,000, America, 4.7 per 100,000. Mental health wake up call.

I can't begin to understand the pain that the.friends and family of those lost to this horrible act of evil. But trying to ban guns is not the best way to stop this. If a person has evil intent they will find a way to do evil. 9/11 required no guns, just a couple of box cutters. The Boston marathon killings were done with pressure cookers. People have been run down at parades by trucks. Cain slew Able with a rock. Prosecute the guilty, identify troubled youth and get them help, protect yourself and your loved ones by being ready and able to defend yourself.
If making guns illegal would actually work I would be 100% in favor of it. Let's try making DRUGS ILLEGAL first so that there are no drug issues and see how well that goes.

[Cyndee@twc.com]

Guns cant shot them selves some one has too pull the trigger. Take away guns -if they want to kill they do so another way , baseball bats, cars knives . anything/. We had a killer drive into a parade, In New york they push you in front of a on coming train. We need to have stable families and teach respect. Bring GOD back into the schoo;ws

[Topspinmo]

You have a very convincing style of writing, very confident. I am truly impressed. I would love to have a country where only women could own guns because it is based on a STATISTICAL FACT - and would be a real solution - I would even vote for it if it was on a referendum bill. My opinion IS also based on a STATISTICAL FACT.......that we are an outlier amount all countries of the world and # 1 in mass murders and gun deaths. It JUST CAN'T be some COINCIDENCE that we ALSO have the MOST availability of guns in the world.
.........And I would also say that the genesis of the problem was when the Gun Manufacturers and their propaganda machine AKA the NRA decided that "GREED IS GOOD"..........around 1999

And that country would be overrun and taken over by men with guns. Majority of women are motherly and can not do what has to be done for protection of All. Now I agree for few cold blooded killers, but most are what we think of—- moms, nice, warm, and nurturing.

[Sherry8bal]

19 innocent children, 2 dedicated teachers, lives lost, solution????? More guns, bigger prisons, NOT. Japan, no guns unless police and military, murder rate .3 percent per 100,000, America, 4.7 per 100,000. Mental health wake up call.

You can blame the libs on this one. It's NOT the guns that kill, it's the people and/or nut jobs behind them. I'm sick of "mental health" calling. These kind of people need long, long prison terms but they don't want to do that. It's like revolving door prison reform for them. At least this person was killed and taxpayers don't have to waste anymore money on him. It was shameful what Beto did in the TV conference with the grieving families in the audience and he's trying to grandstand for his own benefit. What a loser! Why anyone would vote for something as callous as he is beyond my comprehension. Such a tragic ordeal but, once again, you can't blame the guns!

[MartinSE]

Do you really think that I believe that you can, or should take away all guns?

No, I was addressing the other 50% of the posters.


As I previously posted, people are comparing apples to pears. The mantra continues to be more gun control and those who question more gun control are not looking for solutions.


Do you really think I am suggesting JUST more gun controls?

Other than you, show posts of people making suggestions (other than taking away cars)


Given all of the information coming out about the murderer of these children, if he was FLAGGED for mental health issues in the FBI database as he should have been, he would not have passed the background check that the FBI approved. He would therefore not have been able to purchase the two rifles legally.

This is one example of system failure. How about fixing what is broke and then determine what is needed to close identified gaps?



ANYTHING that is broken, should be fixed, I completely agree. If he should not have been able to obtain 2 AR15s, then the person who enabled that should be charged with assessor to premeditated murder. In fact ANYONE illegally selling a weapon that is used to commit any murder should be charged. This should also include ANYONE that sells a gun. Gun shows, private sales, and any black market sales. If the source of a gun used in a murder can be determined, and if that sale was "illegal" then the persons selling the gun should be charged.

Thank you that is actually a suggestion that we CAN do. Wanna bet we will be told why it won/t work instead of joining in to get it done?


Please provide proof "that it is easier to get a gun in many states" than a drivers license.

First please show where it is illegal to fire a firearm while intoxicated. It IS illegal to drive while intoxicated. It is illegal to drive faster than the posted speed limit, show laws limiting how fast you can fire your weapon, or where. Try driving on the court house lawn? You will be towed, try walk onto the Capital steps, and waving your guns, you will be applauded. I think you get the point.

Let's take the one that pertains to this thread - Texas: How to Apply for a Texas Driver License | Department of Public Safety (https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/driver-license/how-apply-texas-driver-license)

To get a Drivers license:

The Department issues driver licenses valid for up to eight years to Texas residents 18 years of age and older. The Texas Driver’s Handbook is available online to help you qualify for a Texas driver license. You will need to provide proof of the following to apply for a driver license:

* U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence
* Texas Residency
* Identity, and
* Social Security Number
* Evidence of Texas Vehicle Registration* for each vehicle you own. Registration must be current. Visit Texas DMV vehicle registration for more information (New Residents who are surrendering an out-of-state driver license only)
* Proof of Insurance* for each vehicle you own
* If you do not own a vehicle, you will sign a statement affirming this.

Additionally, you will need to provide evidence of completion of:

* Impact Texas Driver (ITD) if you will be taking a driving test for the issuance of your driver license**
* A six-hour adult Driver Education course, if you are 18 through 24 years of age (Does not apply to new residents who are 18 years of age or older and surrendering a valid, unexpired out-of-state driver license)
* Once you have gathered the necessary documents and completed the required courses, you will need to do the following:

* Complete the driver license application before arriving at your local office (This form is also available at all driver license offices).
* Make an appointment at a driver license office.
* Provide the following documentation to the license and permit specialist:
* Application for the issuance of a driver license
* U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence
* Identity, and
* Social Security Number
* Provide your signature for DL or ID.
* Provide your thumbprints.
* Have your picture taken.
* Pay the application fee.
* Pass the vision exam.
* Take and pass the knowledge and driving tests. You may complete the testing requirements at the DL office by scheduling an appointment online or through a Third Party provider. Read about testing in other languages and driving test requirements.

Now, what are the requirements to buy a gun in Texas? Buying - Gun Laws - Guides at Texas State Law Library (https://guides.sll.texas.gov/gun-laws/buying)

I won't copy it here, because almost all that is there are links to explain who CAN NOT purchase a gun (felons, etc) but the only topic listing a requirement is AGE. One Retirement - AGE. Nothing about things you have to do - testing, training, demonstrating competence, etc etc etc. (they left off affording it)

Compare the two. Obviously, Texas is very afraid of people driving on their streets, but if you want to kill children - no so hard. If you want, you can eliminate any duplicates from the two lists (US Citizenship, Texas resident, etc.) Drivers license still wins by a mile.


As I have said multiple times before, if you want to make progress then focus on the why and try and fix it. The problem with looking at the why is that it is not going to change anything in the short term. When the "quick fixes" ultimately don't work, how many of those people who proposed/supported them will be willing to look into the eyes of survivors of future mass killings and explain how their promised fixes didn't work?

I absolutely agree we should focus on "WHY" and solve that. Much of my career was as a consulting Systems Analysts. The WHY question was always the second thing I did. First the company wanted me to stop the bleeding (so to speak) - mitigate the problem, so they could get back to making money while I took the time to identify the actual problem.

But, I don't know about any one else, but I can walk and chew gum at the same time. So, why not implement mitigation techniques while we try to determine the WHY so we can solve it. Why not look for low hanging fruit that we can all agree on and implement while the brainiacs look for how to solve societies cultural issues. And yes, but is SOMETHING is broken in the US, since this is a uniquely US problem.

[Topspinmo]

That boat has sailed. Your generation refuses to accept responsibility for the lousy teaching of the generation that actually raised today's kids. If only those kids' parents had better role models (their own parents) then maybe the grandkids wouldn't be so rotten today.

You want to fix the family, then stop telling kids it's okay to carry around AR-15s.

Wouldn’t you be in that same generation?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Wouldn’t you be in that same generation?

Only marginally. I'm from the tail end of the boomer generation. Also, I chose not to have children. So no - blame ain't on me. It's on all the boomers who had kids and didn't teach them how to parent.

[Wilson02852]

Auto manufacturers for fast cars

Civil Engineers for dangerous highway designs.

Dairy farmers for air pollution and high cholesterol.

And on and on. Yeah last but not least the supreme designer of the perfect human.

[ThirdOfFive]

We geezers certainly do have all the answers--even if most of those answers contradict the answers of others. But not only do we solve nothing, for the most part we cannot even really define the problem. Mostly we just fall back on our prejudices.

Sometimes it pays to get closer to the source. I had a conversation with my granddaughter some time ago, really about social skills but applicable here too. Her statement? "The reason that so many people of my generation are such total losers socially is because they never really learned HOW. Their "socialization" is social media".

That deserves some careful pondering, from a couple of aspects. Social media in some part (large part?) has become a surrogate parent to kids since--oh--the mid 1990s or so. A kid behind a screen can be anything he or she wants to be, and convince others that he is who he portrays himself as being. He's rarely if ever in personal contact with many of those online "friends" so he doesn't worry too much about being outed as a phony. His world probably--and social life certainly--are words on a screen. Personally he may be someone who other kids pick on, or who lags behind in school, or whatever. But he doesn't have the social skills to deal with those issues in person, so he just hides from them while building up his social media persona.

Couple that with the fact that no matter how far out or bizarre someone's ideas are, he or she can find uncountable sources on the internet that agree with his ideas. He doesn't discuss them in person with the people he encounters in daily life but he DOES discuss them with like-minded people on social media. He's not looking for information so much as validation (a common problem, even among us geezers), and he finds it. Doesn't matter how far out. The world is flat--people of one religion drink the blood of the children of another--One race will eliminate another race unless people who believe like HE believes intervene, etc. etc. His socialization is mainly with people with beliefs equally or even more bizarre than his. The REAL world--the world of face-to-face interactions with peers, practicing the skills needed to get along in daily life, knowing what to say and what not to say, becomes less and less important. It is a bad confluence of negativity. It is a bomb, in some cases, primed to go off.

Okay. Factor #2. A kid growing up in America today is taught to FEAR guns. Guns are EEEEEEVIL. Guns are SCARY. Only BAD people have guns. He hears it (if he hears anything) incessantly about it in school. So--here we have an insecure, alienated kid, saturated with bizarre ideas, who buys, borrows or steals a gun. His online persona portrays him as a swaggering bad guy. He takes the gun and becomes that guy. Maybe he only wants to scare people (how many kids bring guns to school just to show other kids?). Maybe his bizarre ideas and viewpoints dictate that violence is the answer to whatever his twisted mind tells him the problem happens to be.

And the bomb goes off.

It is no coincidence that the rise in these school shootings parallels the rise in social media usage, and even more precisely, the lack of effective parenting in lieu of the kid living on social media. They're not taught much else--at least not much else that sticks. An alienated kid or young adult filled with bizarre ideas is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And in all too many cases, it does.

Okay. Even if the admittedly-dramatized scenario above is largely true (and I believe, generally, that it is) just knowing it does not solve the problem. It all goes back to the parents BEING parents, teaching their kids proper socialization and just plain HUMAN interaction, and monitoring the poison that they all too often find on the internet. Banning or limiting guns is not the answer (though I believe that there are a lot of things we can do to minimize the possibility of school shootings). It will probably take as long to fix this problem as it did to create it in the first place. But until we fix the FAMILIES, this problem will remain.

[MartinSE]

But trying to ban guns is not the best way to stop this.

There are wacky-doodles on both sides. Sovereign Citizens believe that don't need a license to drive, and don't have to pay income tax. Far left wacky-doodles want to remove all guns (ban).

I will assume you are neither of those, and I know I am not. So, can we stop with the BAN GUNs argument. It is just noise and accomplishes nothing. Anyone with an IQ higher than a rock knows it will not work.

[dhdallas]

19 innocent children, 2 dedicated teachers, lives lost, solution????? More guns, bigger prisons, NOT. Japan, no guns unless police and military, murder rate .3 percent per 100,000, America, 4.7 per 100,000. Mental health wake up call.

Why don't you do us all a favor and move there!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

We geezers certainly do have all the answers--even if most of those answers contradict the answers of others. But not only do we solve nothing, for the most part we cannot even really define the problem. Mostly we just fall back on our prejudices.

Sometimes it pays to get closer to the source. I had a conversation with my granddaughter some time ago, really about social skills but applicable here too. Her statement? "The reason that so many people of my generation are such total losers socially is because they never really learned HOW. Their "socialization" is social media".

That deserves some careful pondering, from a couple of aspects. Social media in some part (large part?) has become a surrogate parent to kids since--oh--the mid 1990s or so. A kid behind a screen can be anything he or she wants to be, and convince others that he is who he portrays himself as being. He's rarely if ever in personal contact with many of those online "friends" so he doesn't worry too much about being outed as a phony. His world probably--and social life certainly--are words on a screen. Personally he may be someone who other kids pick on, or who lags behind in school, or whatever. But he doesn't have the social skills to deal with those issues in person, so he just hides from them while building up his social media persona.

Couple that with the fact that no matter how far out or bizarre someone's ideas are, he or she can find uncountable sources on the internet that agree with his ideas. He doesn't discuss them in person with the people he encounters in daily life but he DOES discuss them with like-minded people on social media. He's not looking for information so much as validation (a common problem, even among us geezers), and he finds it. Doesn't matter how far out. The world is flat--people of one religion drink the blood of the children of another--One race will eliminate another race unless people who believe like HE believes intervene, etc. etc. His socialization is mainly with people with beliefs equally or even more bizarre than his. The REAL world--the world of face-to-face interactions with peers, practicing the skills needed to get along in daily life, knowing what to say and what not to say, becomes less and less important. It is a bad confluence of negativity. It is a bomb, in some cases, primed to go off.

Okay. Factor #2. A kid growing up in America today is taught to FEAR guns. Guns are EEEEEEVIL. Guns are SCARY. Only BAD people have guns. He hears it (if he hears anything) incessantly about it in school. So--here we have an insecure, alienated kid, saturated with bizarre ideas, who buys, borrows or steals a gun. His online persona portrays him as a swaggering bad guy. He takes the gun and becomes that guy. Maybe he only wants to scare people (how many kids bring guns to school just to show other kids?). Maybe his bizarre ideas and viewpoints dictate that violence is the answer to whatever his twisted mind tells him the problem happens to be.

And the bomb goes off.

It is no coincidence that the rise in these school shootings parallels the rise in social media usage, and even more precisely, the lack of effective parenting in lieu of the kid living on social media. They're not taught much else--at least not much else that sticks. An alienated kid or young adult filled with bizarre ideas is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And in all too many cases, it does.

Okay. Even if the admittedly-dramatized scenario above is largely true (and I believe, generally, that it is) just knowing it does not solve the problem. It all goes back to the parents BEING parents, teaching their kids proper socialization and just plain HUMAN interaction, and monitoring the poison that they all too often find on the internet. Banning or limiting guns is not the answer (though I believe that there are a lot of things we can do to minimize the possibility of school shootings). It will probably take as long to fix this problem as it did to create it in the first place. But until we fix the FAMILIES, this problem will remain.

You're seeing this with the same myopic lens that you complain about in others.

People living in the suburbs and cities were also taught to fear guns. At least in the cities and suburbs where I grew up. In the more rural areas, everyone had a rifle near the back door to chase off coyotes and bears. But you NEVER heard anything about that, on our side of the county. Why? Because there were no coyotes and bears on our side of the county. We had no need for guns. In our area, the purpose of guns was to shoot people. And civilized people simply didn't DO that. No - the only people who shot other people were criminals, and cops who chased down criminals.

In our part of free America, we were free to not NEED guns. It was an idyllic upbringing, FREE from crime, FREE from violence, FREE from the need to regulate a thing. We were self-regulating.

Sadly - that idyllic free society has become more and more isolated from the rest of the country. But blaming it on the current batch of kids being afraid of guns just can't possibly be true. Because if it were true, and 18-year-old kid wouldn't have used one to kill 19 other kids this week.

[Jacob85]

Interesting that these other countries all have people with mental health issues but don’t have the problems we do with gun violence. We certainly need to focus on stricter gun laws!

[MartinSE]

We geezers certainly do have all the answers--even if most of those answers contradict the answers of others. But not only do we solve nothing, for the most part we cannot even really define the problem. Mostly we just fall back on our prejudices.

Sometimes it pays to get closer to the source. I had a conversation with my granddaughter some time ago, really about social skills but applicable here too. Her statement? "The reason that so many people of my generation are such total losers socially is because they never really learned HOW. Their "socialization" is social media".

That deserves some careful pondering, from a couple of aspects. Social media in some part (large part?) has become a surrogate parent to kids since--oh--the mid 1990s or so. A kid behind a screen can be anything he or she wants to be, and convince others that he is who he portrays himself as being. He's rarely if ever in personal contact with many of those online "friends" so he doesn't worry too much about being outed as a phony. His world probably--and social life certainly--are words on a screen. Personally he may be someone who other kids pick on, or who lags behind in school, or whatever. But he doesn't have the social skills to deal with those issues in person, so he just hides from them while building up his social media persona.

Couple that with the fact that no matter how far out or bizarre someone's ideas are, he or she can find uncountable sources on the internet that agree with his ideas. He doesn't discuss them in person with the people he encounters in daily life but he DOES discuss them with like-minded people on social media. He's not looking for information so much as validation (a common problem, even among us geezers), and he finds it. Doesn't matter how far out. The world is flat--people of one religion drink the blood of the children of another--One race will eliminate another race unless people who believe like HE believes intervene, etc. etc. His socialization is mainly with people with beliefs equally or even more bizarre than his. The REAL world--the world of face-to-face interactions with peers, practicing the skills needed to get along in daily life, knowing what to say and what not to say, becomes less and less important. It is a bad confluence of negativity. It is a bomb, in some cases, primed to go off.

Okay. Factor #2. A kid growing up in America today is taught to FEAR guns. Guns are EEEEEEVIL. Guns are SCARY. Only BAD people have guns. He hears it (if he hears anything) incessantly about it in school. So--here we have an insecure, alienated kid, saturated with bizarre ideas, who buys, borrows or steals a gun. His online persona portrays him as a swaggering bad guy. He takes the gun and becomes that guy. Maybe he only wants to scare people (how many kids bring guns to school just to show other kids?). Maybe his bizarre ideas and viewpoints dictate that violence is the answer to whatever his twisted mind tells him the problem happens to be.

And the bomb goes off.

It is no coincidence that the rise in these school shootings parallels the rise in social media usage, and even more precisely, the lack of effective parenting in lieu of the kid living on social media. They're not taught much else--at least not much else that sticks. An alienated kid or young adult filled with bizarre ideas is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And in all too many cases, it does.

Okay. Even if the admittedly-dramatized scenario above is largely true (and I believe, generally, that it is) just knowing it does not solve the problem. It all goes back to the parents BEING parents, teaching their kids proper socialization and just plain HUMAN interaction, and monitoring the poison that they all too often find on the internet. Banning or limiting guns is not the answer (though I believe that there are a lot of things we can do to minimize the possibility of school shootings). It will probably take as long to fix this problem as it did to create it in the first place. But until we fix the FAMILIES, this problem will remain.

Almost nothing you posted applies to me or my family. I seriously doubt it applies to most families.

I do not accept your daughter as a expert in the problems of America. Sorry, but you start saying how people are just expressing their opinions and then expressed yours and your daughters (and you seemed to present your daughter as a expert witness in sociology.

And, I would suggest that social media, video games, et al, are just as prevalent around the world as they are here, yet, 4% of worlds population accounts for 99.9% of the class room murders.

If you want an opinion, the gun rights argument is the root of the problem. It is used to scare gun owners into hating people that want to stop th murder children. Listening to the "gun rights" extremists, it seems they don't think children live are as important as shooting deer or blowing up water melons.

Now, that was OVER THE TOP on my part. Which I did very intentionally to explain why people that want to solve the problem are so frustrated.

Imagine, mass murders will just take cars and drive then into the school to kill children if that is what they want to do.

[Diverdave]

Sorry, this shooter did not lie on the background check, Texas doesn’t require one. He just turned 18 and legally purchased 2 ar15s a day later and then killed 21 people.

It’s hard to enforce laws that don’t exist.

To sell a gun at a retail level requires a FFL, Federal Firearms License. Federal law (not Texas) requires a FBI background check prior to purchasing any Firearm. There is no way that you can buy a gun from a retailer or any responsible gun owner anywhere in the US without a FBI background check. I know, I had my FFL for several years and the FBI made regular inspection visits. I would risk serious jail time if I couldn't account for every gun and produce the FFL background check for every purchase. If a private individual sells a gun without going through a FFL dealer they can be held responsible for whatever is done with that firearm. You would be insane to take that risk and end up in jail for what happened with the gun you sold.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Interesting that these other countries all have people with mental health issues but don’t have the problems we do with gun violence. We certainly need to focus on stricter gun laws!

I wonder why certain people are so averse to universal background checks. It's almost as though they're afraid someone will find out they've done something wrong.

Universal background checks, RE-classifying AR-15s as assault weapons (that's how they were, before they were DEclassified as assault weapons), and banning same-day sales of firearms at gun shows (because of the universal background check requirement) would be a good start.

[dewilson58]

To sell a gun at a retail level requires a FFL, Federal Firearms License. Federal law (not Texas) requires a FBI background check prior to purchasing any Firearm. There is no way that you can buy a gun from a retailer or any responsible gun owner anywhere in the US without a FBI background check. I know, I had my FFL for several years and the FBI made regular inspection visits. I would risk serious jail time if I couldn't account for every gun and produce the FFL background check for every purchase. If a private individual sells a gun without going through a FFL dealer they can be held responsible for whatever is done with that firearm. You would be insane to take that risk and end up in jail for what happened with the gun you sold.

Yes, but facts do not fit everyone's agenda.

[MartinSE]

Guns cant shot them selves some one has too pull the trigger. Take away guns -if they want to kill they do so another way , baseball bats, cars knives . anything/. We had a killer drive into a parade, In New york they push you in front of a on coming train. We need to have stable families and teach respect. Bring GOD back into the schoo;ws

So, guns don't make it easier to kill people? You seriously believe an 18 year old could take a baseball bat into a school and kill 19 children in minutes - I would pay to see that.

Give me a break, at least have enough compassion to be sensible. Yes, people who want to kill will find a way to kill - guns just make it easier and more efficient.

Maybe there is a reason the pentagon is not shipping a massive amounts of bats to the Ukraine.

[ThirdOfFive]

Almost nothing you posted applies to me or my family. I seriously doubt it applies to most families.

I do not accept your daughter as a expert in the problems of America. Sorry, but you start saying how people are just expressing their opinions and then expressed yours and your daughters (and you seemed to present your daughter as a expert witness in sociology.

And, I would suggest that social media, video games, et al, are just as prevalent around the world as they are here, yet, 4% of worlds population accounts for 99.9% of the class room murders.

If you want an opinion, the gun rights argument is the root of the problem. It is used to scare gun owners into hating people that want to stop th murder children. Listening to the "gun rights" extremists, it seems they don't think children live are as important as shooting deer or blowing up water melons.

Now, that was OVER THE TOP on my part. Which I did very intentionally to explain why people that want to solve the problem are so frustrated.

Imagine, mass murders will just take cars and drive then into the school to kill children if that is what they want to do.
Granddaughter.

[ThirdOfFive]

Yes, but facts do not fit everyone's agenda.
One of the more cogent posts in this thread, in my opinion.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

To sell a gun at a retail level requires a FFL, Federal Firearms License. Federal law (not Texas) requires a FBI background check prior to purchasing any Firearm. There is no way that you can buy a gun from a retailer or any responsible gun owner anywhere in the US without a FBI background check. I know, I had my FFL for several years and the FBI made regular inspection visits. I would risk serious jail time if I couldn't account for every gun and produce the FFL background check for every purchase. If a private individual sells a gun without going through a FFL dealer they can be held responsible for whatever is done with that firearm. You would be insane to take that risk and end up in jail for what happened with the gun you sold.

You're not required to be a licensed retail gun seller to sell guns to people. But IF you are one, you must run a check on your customer.

Only some states have regulations requiring private sales go through licensed dealers.

It isn't a universal thing. That's why people are pushing for universal background checks. Universal meaning - anyone selling a firearm needs to run a check on their customer or they are violating the law.

[MartinSE]

To sell a gun at a retail level requires a FFL, Federal Firearms License. Federal law (not Texas) requires a FBI background check prior to purchasing any Firearm. There is no way that you can buy a gun from a retailer or any responsible gun owner anywhere in the US without a FBI background check. I know, I had my FFL for several years and the FBI made regular inspection visits. I would risk serious jail time if I couldn't account for every gun and produce the FFL background check for every purchase. If a private individual sells a gun without going through a FFL dealer they can be held responsible for whatever is done with that firearm. You would be insane to take that risk and end up in jail for what happened with the gun you sold.

I didn't say they didn't take the background test - I said it appears they passed it. If his juvenile record is sealed (I don't know if background checks can break that seal) and he just turned 18 2 days previously, chances are he did not have any priors that would have raised a flag. So, my assumption (based on what I have read and heard) is that he LEGALLY obtained the guns and 450 rounds of ammo.

And I COMPLETELY agree with you. ANYONE that sells a firearm that is then used to murder someone should be charged with accessory to murder.

[MartinSE]

"If you take away their guns they will just use bats".

Question, why is the pentagon not sending more bats to the Ukraine.

[MartinSE]

How about instead of arming teachers that don't want it and are not competent, let's give all the kids 9mm handguns when they get to school. Replace the library with a shooting range and have them check them back in when they go home.

What could go wrong with a class full of 9 year olds armed with 9mm's. After all I don't recall any age limits on the 2nd amendment.

Even this 18 year old murderer would not be crazy enough to go into a room full of armed 9 year olds.

[Burgy]

I don't think the right to bear arms should include Uzzi's, AR rifles etc. and being so easy to get for a newly18 year old. It wouldn't fix everything but might cut down on MASS shootings and police waiting an hour for backup

[MartinSE]

I wonder why certain people are so averse to universal background checks. It's almost as though they're afraid someone will find out they've done something wrong.

Universal background checks, RE-classifying AR-15s as assault weapons (that's how they were, before they were DEclassified as assault weapons), and banning same-day sales of firearms at gun shows (because of the universal background check requirement) would be a good start.

One argument I have heard is that they do not want to be "on a list" because the government will send agents out to "collect" their guns.

I don't buy it, but it was at least a reason I could understand some people feeling strongly about. There are studies in history that show one of the first steps of an autocrat is to take away peoples guns. Hence all the claims Obama was "coming for our guns" - even though more guns were sold under Obama than under Bush and no one ever reported having feds come take their guns away. Just saying.

[MartinSE]

You're not required to be a licensed retail gun seller to sell guns to people. But IF you are one, you must run a check on your customer.

Only some states have regulations requiring private sales go through licensed dealers.

It isn't a universal thing. That's why people are pushing for universal background checks. Universal meaning - anyone selling a firearm needs to run a check on their customer or they are violating the law.

True, and I think Universal background checks could help.

In addition, the doctor patient confidentiality should be considered, and healthcare professionals should be required to check a box saying, "recommended for gun purchase" or "not recommended for gun purchase". That keeps the why private, but could help with background checks. Of course, that has problems too - like a doctor doesn't want ANYONE to get guns, or a doctor wants EVERYONE to get guns. etc. etc. etc.

No solution is perfect.

[Trayderjoe]

No, I was addressing the other 50% of the posters.

Do you really think I am suggesting JUST more gun controls?

Other than you, show posts of people making suggestions (other than taking away cars) Unfortunately that was not clear in the original reply.

First please show where it is illegal to fire a firearm while intoxicated. It IS illegal to drive while intoxicated. It is illegal to drive faster than the posted speed limit, show laws limiting how fast you can fire your weapon, or where. Try driving on the court house lawn? You will be towed, try walk onto the Capital steps, and waving your guns, you will be applauded. I think you get the point.

Not sure what this has to do with my post, seems to "muddy the waters"

Let's take the one that pertains to this thread - Texas: How to Apply for a Texas Driver License | Department of Public Safety (https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/driver-license/how-apply-texas-driver-license)

To get a Drivers license:

The Department issues driver licenses valid for up to eight years to Texas residents 18 years of age and older. The Texas Driver’s Handbook is available online to help you qualify for a Texas driver license. You will need to provide proof of the following to apply for a driver license:

* U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence
* Texas Residency
* Identity, and
* Social Security Number
* Evidence of Texas Vehicle Registration* for each vehicle you own. Registration must be current. Visit Texas DMV vehicle registration for more information (New Residents who are surrendering an out-of-state driver license only)
* Proof of Insurance* for each vehicle you own
* If you do not own a vehicle, you will sign a statement affirming this.

Additionally, you will need to provide evidence of completion of:

* Impact Texas Driver (ITD) if you will be taking a driving test for the issuance of your driver license**
* A six-hour adult Driver Education course, if you are 18 through 24 years of age (Does not apply to new residents who are 18 years of age or older and surrendering a valid, unexpired out-of-state driver license)
* Once you have gathered the necessary documents and completed the required courses, you will need to do the following:

* Complete the driver license application before arriving at your local office (This form is also available at all driver license offices).
* Make an appointment at a driver license office.
* Provide the following documentation to the license and permit specialist:
* Application for the issuance of a driver license
* U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence
* Identity, and
* Social Security Number
* Provide your signature for DL or ID.
* Provide your thumbprints.
* Have your picture taken.
* Pay the application fee.
* Pass the vision exam.
* Take and pass the knowledge and driving tests. You may complete the testing requirements at the DL office by scheduling an appointment online or through a Third Party provider. Read about testing in other languages and driving test requirements.

Now, what are the requirements to buy a gun in Texas? Buying - Gun Laws - Guides at Texas State Law Library (https://guides.sll.texas.gov/gun-laws/buying)

I won't copy it here, because almost all that is there are links to explain who CAN NOT purchase a gun (felons, etc) but the only topic listing a requirement is AGE. One Retirement - AGE. Nothing about things you have to do - testing, training, demonstrating competence, etc etc etc. (they left off affording it)

Compare the two. Obviously, Texas is very afraid of people driving on their streets, but if you want to kill children - no so hard. If you want, you can eliminate any duplicates from the two lists (US Citizenship, Texas resident, etc.) Drivers license still wins by a mile.

Well not quite. In order to purchase a firearm in Texas, you need either a driver's license or a Texas State ID (link (https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/driver-license/how-apply-texas-identification-card)) for which you need proof of the following:

U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence.
Texas Residency
Identity and
Social Security Number

So BEFORE you can even buy a gun in Texas, you have to either meet the requirements of a driver's license or have lawfully obtained a Texas State ID. THEN you still need to pass a FEDERALLY required background check if purchasing from a gun dealer as this killer did. Oh and by the way, my original request still stands, please provide proof that it is easier to buy a gun legally than to get a driver's license "in many states". The Texas example doesn't work.

But, I don't know about any one else, but I can walk and chew gum at the same time. So, why not implement mitigation techniques while we try to determine the WHY so we can solve it. Why not look for low hanging fruit that we can all agree on and implement while the brainiacs look for how to solve societies cultural issues. And yes, but is SOMETHING is broken in the US, since this is a uniquely US problem.

Interesting. I too have been trained in multiple methodologies such as Root Cause Analysis and Six Sigma. What is consistent is identifying the problem and sustainable fixes. Handling "low hanging fruit" is easy in a company for example, where the "bosses" have the ability to shutdown an operation temporarily while these interim fixes are implemented. However, we are not talking about a company with a somewhat limited set of stakeholders but a country with so many more different stakeholders.

[Trayderjoe]

True, and I think Universal background checks could help.

In addition, the doctor patient confidentiality should be considered, and healthcare professionals should be required to check a box saying, "recommended for gun purchase" or "not recommended for gun purchase". That keeps the why private, but could help with background checks. Of course, that has problems too - like a doctor doesn't want ANYONE to get guns, or a doctor wants EVERYONE to get guns. etc. etc. etc.

No solution is perfect.

Now here is a concrete proposal that could move forward. Will there be kinks to iron it out? Yes, but at least it is a recommendation that can be moved forward. Whether it becomes functional or not is irrelevant to the concept of proposing a specific solution versus repeating the mantra.

[chuckpedrey]

American was founded on a Christian ethnic. It is the Christian Bible that the founding fathers based their lives on.

[MartinSE]

Unfortunately that was not clear in the original reply.

Sorry


Not sure what this has to do with my post, seems to "muddy the waters"


Our exchange was about difficulty in obtaining a drivers license vs a gun. Driving restrictions after you have the license are also more strict than a firearm.



Well not quite. In order to purchase a firearm in Texas, you need either a driver's license or a Texas State ID (link (https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/driver-license/how-apply-texas-identification-card)) for which you need proof of the following:

U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence.
Texas Residency
Identity and
Social Security Number

So BEFORE you can even buy a gun in Texas, you have to either meet the requirements of a driver's license or have lawfully obtained a Texas State ID. THEN you still need to pass a FEDERALLY required background check. Oh and by the way, my original request still stands, please provide proof that it is easier to buy a gun legally than to get a driver's license "in many states". The Texas example doesn't work.



You left out my saying in my post that you were retired to provide ID, etc. In other words sates define who CAN NOT buy a gun, but many place no requirements other than things that mean you are NOT being allowed.

My post referenced Texas requirements for gun purchase as an example of one of the many you requested. And you left out/ignored the numerous testing, training and demonstrations of competency I listed, which does show it is much "harder" to get a gun than a drivers license, which is exactly what you asked for and then ignored.

As to proving many states, I used a state which is pertinent to THIS conversation as an example - Texas, I will leave it up to you to find the others that have more requirements.

Hint: I don't know of a single state that doesn't require some testing to obtain a drivers license - competency, vision, etc. - I know some states that require competency testing to buy a gun, but I don't think all do. All states require some kind of testing to prove driving knowledge (some will accept other states license as proof). So, I feel safe in suggesting it will not be hard to find that proof. I often get PMs complaining about too many references/links and too long posts. So, have fun, and if you go to the trouble to check all states and find no others or even fewer than half, I would be very interested. (But I am sure that will not happen).


I too have been trained in multiple methodologies such as Root Cause Analysis and Six Sigma. What is consistent is identifying the problem and sustainable fixes. Handling "low hanging fruit" is easy in a company for example, where the "bosses" have the ability to shutdown an operation temporarily while these interim fixes are implemented. However, we are not talking about a company with a somewhat limited set of stakeholders but a country with so many more different stakeholders.

I agree root cause is vital and in complex situations can take a long time to determine.

Many of the companies I worked for has issues with production lines that would cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour to shut down and so that was NOT an option unless lives were at risk. It is possible to find and implement temporary "work arounds" or patches on live systems.

Are you suggesting we do nothing and just accept the death toll that is growing almost weekly for the past twenty years until we can determine with some level of certainty the root cause? I hope not.

And let me close this post bye saying thank you for the civil discourse and pertinent comments and questions. If more would do this we could make progress. It is possible, and you sir are proof.

[Sarah_W]

Isn't it hypocritical and ironic that no guns will be allowed at the NRA event this week? Don't you wish that those precautions were in place at every supermarket, church, movie theater, etc?
How about those privileged few (mostly big name politicians) who walk around with a security detail?

Not hypocritical and not surprising whenever there is a speaker who has a Secret Service detail they will require no guns allowed.

Any business can put a sign on their door that says no guns allowed and it has to be honored. I'm not sure the point of that considering that guns are not allowed on school grounds and mass murders don't obey those requirements and kill innocent children. Signs will not stop mass shootings.

[Johnsocat]

The point is to compare the US gun violence to other countries' gun violence. That's the important point.

Only if you are researching where you want to live. Our country is unique. Apples to oranges...

[MartinSE]

American was founded on a Christian ethnic. It is the Christian Bible that the founding fathers based their lives on.

Sorry this is also a myth.

Many of the "founding fathers" were atheists. And the theists were often (mostly?) Puritans (Calvinist's and was based on the Holiness movement) that would never consider what we consider Christians to be Christians today. Women were little more than possessions, etc. Maybe you would like to start "testing" women charged with witch craft? They came here specifically to escape the Church of Englands persecution, and they could persecute anyone not toeing the line to their beliefs.

And if you want Christian beliefs in government, lets start with feeding the poor, giving housing to the homeless, forgiving those that transgress against us, not killing our enemies. You know all those pesky things Jesus told us to do, but evangelicals don't want to do, and instead refer back to the old testament and repeatedly quote the "thous shall nots" and not Jesus saying "thou shalt.

And another point, would you clarifying which Bible you want to make law, and which interpretation of it? Since there are over 200 Christian denominations in the US alone, and over 45,000 in the world.

And does the Pope get a seat in the Christian White House? After all, there are 1.5 billion Catholics and only maybe a 1/2 million Protestants (divided up between 45,000 different interpretations.)

So, I am just. curious, is it YOUR religion you want made law?

Now, could we get back to guns being used to kill children in class rooms for the past 20 years?

"Christians" make up in total about 20% of the worlds population. Yet, some how the other 80% of the world's population are not murdering their children regularly in schools. There are always the occasional wacko dictator, or rebels, or whatever that kills children or others. But, Only in America do we appear to endorse muting children in schools regularly. I say appear, since we have had 20 years to do something about it, and so far we can't agree on anything. 20 years...

[MartinSE]

Only if you are researching where you want to live. Our country is unique. Apples to oranges...

Uh? Huh?

No, considering ALL other countries in the world. The US is the ONLY country that regularly (every week now?) allows children to be murdered while in class for the past 20 years. Apples and Apples.

Australia had one, back in the 1990's, they banned guns. It didn't solve ALL the gun violence, but they don't have a recurring problem with children being murdered in class. (I don't think they have had ANY since that one).

Great Britain had one in 1996, they passed laws banning most guns, guess what, no more mass murders in schools.

[MartinSE]

Not hypocritical and not surprising whenever there is a speaker who has a Secret Service detail they will require no guns allowed.

Any business can put a sign on their door that says no guns allowed and it has to be honored. I'm not sure the point of that considering that guns are not allowed on school grounds and mass murders don't obey those requirements and kill innocent children. Signs will not stop mass shootings.

Uh, yes hypocritical, since we are told repeatedly in every one of these conversations that ALL OF THE murders of children take place in "gun free zones" - so, being gun free obviously will not stop shooters that want to shoot.

So, I respectfully disagree with you. For the Organization that pushes for NO restrictions on carrying guns ANYWHERE, to NOT allow guns while they discuss GUNS ANYWHERE is the perfect example of hypocrisy. (BTW, I thought the NRA was pushing for guns in colleges - schools. Another example of gun anywhere except at our meeting.

[MartinSE]

Now here is a concrete proposal that could move forward. Will there be kinks to iron it out? Yes, but at least it is a recommendation that can be moved forward. Whether it becomes functional or not is irrelevant to the concept of proposing a specific solution versus repeating the mantra.

Thank you

[dewilson58]

Oh ME oh my.

:ohdear:

[Johnsocat]

And when/if our government becomes truly tyrannical, have fun defending yourself with your five round clips and muzzle loaders...
The 2nd ammendment was ratified for a REASON. It specifically states that the right to bear Arms "shall not be infringed". The REASON is not to hunt deer, it is to defend Americans against it's own government. Yet, our government's (Fed, State and Local) HAVE "infringed" by creating gun laws.
We are NOT like Australia, Sweden, Germany, France, the UK or any other country. We have fought for, and died for, the freedoms granted us as Americans in our Constitution. The same Constitution our Military and Federally elected public servants swear to protect.
Guns and their availability are NOT the problem. Our morals, values and ethics are. Our country looks more and more like Sodom and Gamora everyday. Our family structures are broken, single parents, 2 working parents with latchkey kids.... very little time to instill traditional American values in those kids. Instead they are getting those values from a government school system which teaches them a political agenda and "wokeness". Participation trophies instead of good sportsmanship. Test teaching, which eliminates critical thinking skills. And more recently Critical Race Theory and Gender fluidity and identification. Politicians on your evening news have been incredibly nasty in their words, even suggesting people to get in other people's faces, kick them out of your places of business, citing half of Americans as deplorable, super predators, Nazis, dirty Walmart shoppers, homophobic, xenophobic, and many other names. Even talking about beating up the President "behind the barn". One even threatened a Supreme Court Justice saying he "won't know what hit him."
Is it any wonder (or coincidence) these kids are shooting up the schools?
You want to "fix" this problem? Find the root of the problem. HINT : it is NOT the guns nor gun availibility.

[Johnsocat]

Check out Chicago. Strict gun law, high gun violence...

[blueash]

American was founded on a Christian ethnic. It is the Christian Bible that the founding fathers based their lives on.

That is an insidiously wrong statement pushed by some of those of the Christian faith. This country was founded by a bunch of nearly agnostic men who wanted financial and political control over this territory. They had absolutely no disagreement with England over theological concerns and in fact were far LESS religious than the monarchy which claimed to derive its legitimacy from Jesus et al.

Jefferson removed all Jesus is God references from his Bible (https://www.history.com/news/thomas-jefferson-bible-religious-beliefs#:~:text=In%20two%20volumes%2C%20The%20Phil osophy,Enlightenment%2Dera%20sense%20of%20reason.) , actually cut those passages out with a knife. Our Constitution has exactly two references to religion and both strongly state that religious affiliation has no place in our governance.

The ethic of the founders was not rigid evangelical Christianity is was instead based on liberal ideology of natural rights as proposed by Locke and others. The founders were so against religious dogma determining United States governance that they made sure the Post Office, one of the few functions of the Federal Government at the time, operated on Sunday, you know the Christian day of rest and prayer on which you shall refrain from work and keep it holy, the Post Office functioned on Sunday the same as any other day of the week.

" In 1828, the Kentucky Senator Richard M. Johnson, chairman of the Senate Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads and a devout Baptist, declared any federal attempt to give preference to the Christian Sabbath to be unconstitutional. The line between church and state when it came to Sunday mail delivery, he argued, "cannot be too strongly drawn." "

No, what has happened is that once again the real history of the US is being subverted by many who wish to believe that what they now hold true was held true in the 18th century.
Thomas Paine called Christianity a fable. Many were simply Deists (https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214), a religious belief that a God does exist but that he [or she] is not actively involved in our day to day life and that "human experience and rationality—rather than religious dogma and mystery—determine the validity of human beliefs."

That was overwhelmingly the ethic of our founders and where it overlapped with the liberal Protestantism of the day, that was ok. Real history. You can look it up.

[jebartle]

LOCK ALL SCHOOL DOORS, one door entrance with metal detector, I don't care how much it costs, these are our children that need to be protected. Cost, the obnoxious amount spent on campaign funds, that we all ignore, can go toward this.

[MartinSE]

And when/if our government becomes truly tyrannical, have fun defending yourself with your five round clips and muzzle loaders....

And at the time it was argued it was possible for a militia to use muzzle loaders to take back a rogue government.

I expect AR15's against the new XM5 will be found lacking. I expect 9MM against a M1 Abrams will be found lacking. On and On.

Are you suggesting citizens should have Cruise missiles? Why not automatic weapons? Why not F35's? After all, if the constitution - specifically the 2nd amendment - wants to be sure the populous can take back a rogue government , then it would seem to follow the citizens should be allowed to be equally armed.

Let's look at Ukraine - are we sending them civilian weapons? No, we are depleting our military arsenal because they do not have enough weapons locally capable of defending against a modern military.

So, unless you want access to Cruise, M1 Abrams, F35's and more, your argument is some what lacking.

I will completely agree there are many places in the US where a person may need a weapon to protect themselves and their loved ones. I have NO problem with that, or them. I question the need of a citizen to have 1,000 to 5,000 weapons stashed in the survival bunker. I question the need for a private citizen to own and M1 Abrams.

Do you?

[Sarah_W]

And that country would be overrun and taken over by men with guns. Majority of women are motherly and can not do what has to be done for protection of All. Now I agree for few cold blooded killers, but most are what we think of—- moms, nice, warm, and nurturing.

Interestingly, the fastest demographic buying firearms are women. Additionally, women make up a higher percentage seeking professional training in handling firearms. As a certified firearms instructor I am seeing this pattern. More women are also getting into the competitive shooting sports and I think that's great. I mentioned previously I'm the co-founder of the US Womens Shooting Academy. I've taken a woman who had never shot a handgun and after 7 lessons she was pulling from the holster in under a second and hitting a target at 21 feet. I will also note she didn't break a nail!

[MartinSE]

LOCK ALL SCHOOL DOORS, one door entrance with metal detector, I don't care how much it costs, these are our children that need to be protected. Cost, the obnoxious amount spent on campaign funds, that we all ignore, can go toward this.

It is already supposed to be, apparently it isn't always enforced.

Thank you for a suggestion. I place this in the we shall, as opposed the the loud voice of we shall not.

We shall gets things done, we shall not feels good and accomplishes close to nothing.

[Trayderjoe]

Sorry

You left out my saying in my post that you were retired to provide ID, etc. In other words sates define who CAN NOT buy a gun, but many place no requirements other than things that mean you are NOT being allowed.

My post referenced Texas requirements for gun purchase as an example of one of the many you requested. And you left out/ignored the numerous testing, training and demonstrations of competency I listed, which does show it is much "harder" to get a gun than a drivers license, which is exactly what you asked for and then ignored.

As to proving many states, I used a state which is pertinent to THIS conversation as an example - Texas, I will leave it up to you to find the others that have more requirements.

Hint: I don't know of a single state that doesn't require some testing to obtain a drivers license - competency, vision, etc. - I know some states that require competency testing to buy a gun, but I don't think all do. All states require some kind of testing to prove driving knowledge (some will accept other states license as proof). So, I feel safe in suggesting it will not be hard to find that proof. I often get PMs complaining about too many references/links and too long posts. So, have fun, and if you go to the trouble to check all states and find no others or even fewer than half, I would be very interested. (But I am sure that will not happen).

I agree root cause is vital and in complex situations can take a long time to determine.

Many of the companies I worked for has issues with production lines that would cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour to shut down and so that was NOT an option unless lives were at risk. It is possible to find and implement temporary "work arounds" or patches on live systems.

Are you suggesting we do nothing and just accept the death toll that is growing almost weekly for the past twenty years until we can determine with some level of certainty the root cause? I hope not.

And let me close this post bye saying thank you for the civil discourse and pertinent comments and questions. If more would do this we could make progress. It is possible, and you sir are proof.

Actually I did not leave out your quote, I missed it-big difference. If you normalize the two, then the difference between the two is as you indicated, one does have testing requirements (DL) and that purchasing a gun does not require training or testing.

However, your statement: "Compare the two. Obviously, Texas is very afraid of people driving on their streets, but if you want to kill children - no so hard". is inflammatory and does nothing to help move the needle forward. Is it a good idea to own a firearm and not get some sort of training? No, as tragic accidents can and do happen.

Do you think these monsters care If a training requirement is an impediment to acquiring a gun legally? They have already decided to break the law, so what is to prevent them from acquiring a gun illegally?

[jimjamuser]

"Let's return to the 1950s when guns were for hunting game and NOT HUNTING PEOPLE !!!!!!!"

The ethics and values of the 1950s were what prevented people then from what they are doing now. Guns were just as available then. Actually much more so: if you were over 18, in Minnesota at least, you could buy a gun. Or guns. My dad had a collection of well over 50 when he died. But if we EVER had school shootings back then, we certainly didn't hear about it.

We don't have a gun problem. We have a people problem. Fix the PEOPLE and forget about demonizing guns: it is just a convenient way to avoid facing the real issues.
Social tensions are MUCH greater today and also other tensions. Many people have reacted to this by stockpiling many rifles and pistols designed for WAR and to kill people ( you don't buy a 30-round clip to go deer hunting). This made the people feel safer, but mainly it made the Gun Manufacturers more PROFIT and wealth. So they put out propaganda advertisements in Gun magazines and the NRA journal to induce these people to buy MORE guns. In the last 2 years, civilian gun ownership went from a high of 300 million guns to a new high of 400 million guns.
.........More readily available guns equate to MORE gun deaths and crime. To understand how big and BAD the US situation has become - you just need to look at a chart comparison showing gun deaths per 100,000 citizens for ALL the world's countries. Ry far, the US has the MOST !

[MartinSE]

Interestingly, the fastest demographic buying firearms are women. Additionally, women make up a higher percentage seeking professional training in handling firearms. As a certified firearms instructor I am seeing this pattern. More women are also getting into the competitive shooting sports and I think that's great. I mentioned previously I'm the co-founder of the US Womens Shooting Academy. I've taken a woman who had never shot a handgun and after 7 lessons she was pulling from the holster in under a second and hitting a target at 21 feet. I will also note she didn't break a nail!

Thank you for helping - seriously, and thank you for this post. I was not aware that women are the fastest growing demographic. I am glad to hear that too.

And finally, thank you for helping make more responsible gun owners. I completely support responsible gun ownership. I have no desire to own one, but I understand and respect responsible gun owners.

[jimjamuser]

Our national addiction to guns, including assault rifles, is like a broken record. I am sick of the washed out debates and countless massacres, while congress does absolutely nothing. We all know what is the ONLY way this will change . . . elect a particular political party in enough numbers that will control Congress and finally bring sanity to this heartbroken country. Period.
Agreed

[jimjamuser]

My solution is to manufacture only single shot or bolt action rifles and pistols for civilian use starting soon. Then Police can MELT down all semi-autos that they pick up in criminal hands. Also, Police could buy back semi-autos. Eventually, all weapons would be single shot or bolt action. It WOULD take a long time to get ALL semi-autos off the street. But, if you got 10% out of circulation in 5 years, it should lead to a 10% drop in mass murders. At least, that IS A WORKABLE SOLUTION. And it would take ZERO guns away from law abiding citizens, thus 2nd amendment protection.
A workable solution. Each side in the debate has to GIVE some. I don't want to take away any guns, except the obvious MAN-killers!

[Johnsocat]

We are unique in that our Constitution enumerates our right to bear Arms which "shall not be infringed" upon (which current laws actually do).
Other countries do not have our Constitution.

[Sarah_W]

Uh, yes hypocritical, since we are told repeatedly in every one of these conversations that ALL OF THE murders of children take place in "gun free zones" - so, being gun free obviously will not stop shooters that want to shoot.

So, I respectfully disagree with you. For the Organization that pushes for NO restrictions on carrying guns ANYWHERE, to NOT allow guns while they discuss GUNS ANYWHERE is the perfect example of hypocrisy. (BTW, I thought the NRA was pushing for guns in colleges - schools. Another example of gun anywhere except at our meeting.

As stated by someone else previously, the only time the NRA says no guns allowed is when the Secret Service directs them to do so. I've been to NRA conventions while having my 9mm in my purse with no issues whatsoever.

[MartinSE]

Actually I did not leave out your quote, I missed it-big difference. If you normalize the two, then the difference between the two is as you indicated, one does have testing requirements (DL) and that purchasing a gun does not require training or testing.

Thank you


However, your statement: "Compare the two. Obviously, Texas is very afraid of people driving on their streets, but if you want to kill children - no so hard". is inflammatory and does nothing to help move the needle forward. Is it a good idea to own a firearm and not get some sort of training? No, as tragic accidents can and do happen.


You are right, and I was wrong to use that inflammatory wording.


Do you think these monsters care If a training requirement is an impediment to acquiring a gun legally? They have already decided to break the law, so what is to prevent them from acquiring a gun illegally?

I don't know. Ease of access? Why risk it. If these murderers could ONLY purchase from illegal sources, it would be "easier" to run sting operations to catch the illegal purchasers. But, as it stands now, they don't have too - and that is a point. Making it less easy will not deter responsible gun owners from buying, they will simply plan for it. But, someone wanting to murder children in two days may have to find an illegal deal and take the risk of it being a sting.

Not a cure, but a step - a little help.

Imagine if these shooters were captured, and offered plea deals to give up their seller or get the death penalty. Then the illegal seller is charged with murder and hung. It would certain not stop illegal sales but again every little step helps.

I saw a post early on in this thread that "at least he is dead, saves on the cost of the trail". I disagree with that. My personal favorite punishment for these murders would be publicly lowering them into a tree shredder feet first slowly. And stream the event on the Internet and require all OTA media to air live coverage with audio.


Not very liberal of me - is it.

[billethkid]

And at the time it was argued it was possible for a militia to use muzzle loaders to take back a rogue government.

I expect AR15's against the new XM5 will be found lacking. I expect 9MM against a M1 Abrams will be found lacking. On and On.

Are you suggesting citizens should have Cruise missiles? Why not automatic weapons? Why not F35's? After all, if the constitution - specifically the 2nd amendment - wants to be sure the populous can take back a rogue government , then it would seem to follow the citizens should be allowed to be equally armed.

Let's look at Ukraine - are we sending them civilian weapons? No, we are depleting our military arsenal because they do not have enough weapons locally capable of defending against a modern military.

So, unless you want access to Cruise, M1 Abrams, F35's and more, your argument is some what lacking.

I will completely agree there are many places in the US where a person may need a weapon to protect themselves and their loved ones. I have NO problem with that, or them. I question the need of a citizen to have 1,000 to 5,000 weapons stashed in the survival bunker. I question the need for a private citizen to own and M1 Abrams.

Do you?

Why would anybody waste the time even thinking about an isolated case that no way in any way shape or form represents presence of ANY significance.

[jimjamuser]

The 2nd Ammendment is not about hunting or home protection.
It's about the people having the means to resist a tyranical government.

All "semi-automatic" means is the next bullet is loaded after the last is shot. A revolver loads the next bullet by trigger squeeze (or thumb cocking) and anyone with any skill can achieve the same rate of fire as an AR15. Besides, shooting fast means less accuracy, so it's a wash.

As for the New Zealand and Australia argument, they didn't have many mass shooting before confiscation. Australia did force people into quarantine detention during covid. They could because they did not fear an armed populace.

And the reason gun ownership is up is because people fear a tyranical government. When Seattle allowed a group of Communist thugs to take over the city, people bought guns. When those same Communist thugs laid seige to a Federal Courthouse in Portland, people bought guns.

I'm all for personal choice. If you don't like guns, don't buy one.
The best way to resist a tyrannical government is with VOTES, not bullets from man-killing semi-automatic rifles. In the rare case of say a Russian or Chinese invasion (tyrannical governments), they could be resisted with bolt action rifles nicely. Like in a Red Dawn movie - resistors could use a bolt action rifle to take over the enemy's automatic weapons. Anyway, a bolt action is a better long-range sniper rifle than a short range ASSAULT rifle.

[MartinSE]

We are unique in that our Constitution enumerates our right to bear Arms which "shall not be infringed" upon (which current laws actually do).
Other countries do not have our Constitution.

ALL RIGHTS have limits and can be regulated.

Do you believe you should be allowed to own Nukes, Cruise missiles and M1 Abrams? Why not? That would certainly fit not being infringed on.

[Taltarzac725]

Nicely put about the 2nd Amendment. And I believe that in that period in US History they meant a well-regulated militia's Right to Bear Arms and not so much individual settlers and towns people. They were afraid that people still loyal to England might take up arms again or some despot might take over the government which had happened often in Roman history which many learned men read.

And at the time it was argued it was possible for a militia to use muzzle loaders to take back a rogue government.

I expect AR15's against the new XM5 will be found lacking. I expect 9MM against a M1 Abrams will be found lacking. On and On.

Are you suggesting citizens should have Cruise missiles? Why not automatic weapons? Why not F35's? After all, if the constitution - specifically the 2nd amendment - wants to be sure the populous can take back a rogue government , then it would seem to follow the citizens should be allowed to be equally armed.

Let's look at Ukraine - are we sending them civilian weapons? No, we are depleting our military arsenal because they do not have enough weapons locally capable of defending against a modern military.

So, unless you want access to Cruise, M1 Abrams, F35's and more, your argument is some what lacking.

I will completely agree there are many places in the US where a person may need a weapon to protect themselves and their loved ones. I have NO problem with that, or them. I question the need of a citizen to have 1,000 to 5,000 weapons stashed in the survival bunker. I question the need for a private citizen to own and M1 Abrams.

Do you?

[retiredguy123]

After watching several of the news conferences on the event, it seems to me that the media needs to hire more Monday morning quarterbacks. Not.

[jimjamuser]

That is an insidiously wrong statement pushed by some of those of the Christian faith. This country was founded by a bunch of nearly agnostic men who wanted financial and political control over this territory. They had absolutely no disagreement with England over theological concerns and in fact were far LESS religious than the monarchy which claimed to derive its legitimacy from Jesus et al.

Jefferson removed all Jesus is God references from his Bible (https://www.history.com/news/thomas-jefferson-bible-religious-beliefs#:~:text=In%20two%20volumes%2C%20The%20Phil osophy,Enlightenment%2Dera%20sense%20of%20reason.) , actually cut those passages out with a knife. Our Constitution has exactly two references to religion and both strongly state that religious affiliation has no place in our governance.

The ethic of the founders was not rigid evangelical Christianity is was instead based on liberal ideology of natural rights as proposed by Locke and others. The founders were so against religious dogma determining United States governance that they made sure the Post Office, one of the few functions of the Federal Government at the time, operated on Sunday, you know the Christian day of rest and prayer on which you shall refrain from work and keep it holy, the Post Office functioned on Sunday the same as any other day of the week.

" In 1828, the Kentucky Senator Richard M. Johnson, chairman of the Senate Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads and a devout Baptist, declared any federal attempt to give preference to the Christian Sabbath to be unconstitutional. The line between church and state when it came to Sunday mail delivery, he argued, "cannot be too strongly drawn." "

No, what has happened is that once again the real history of the US is being subverted by many who wish to believe that what they now hold true was held true in the 18th century.
Thomas Paine called Christianity a fable. Many were simply Deists (https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214), a religious belief that a God does exist but that he [or she] is not actively involved in our day to day life and that "human experience and rationality—rather than religious dogma and mystery—determine the validity of human beliefs."

That was overwhelmingly the ethic of our founders and where it overlapped with the liberal Protestantism of the day, that was ok. Real history. You can look it up.
Perhaps the most impressive post that I have ever read on TOTV. It was very educational and well written. I rate it 3 Ks for triple Kudos!

[Johnsocat]

ALL RIGHTS have limits and can be regulated.

Do you believe you should be allowed to own Nukes, Cruise missiles and M1 Abrams? Why not? That would certainly fit not being infringed on.

We are not talking about nukes, cruise missiles and tanks... we are talking about guns...
Disregard my point with semantics because that solves the problem under discussion?

[MartinSE]

Why would anybody waste the time even thinking about an isolated case that no way in any way shape or form represents presence of ANY significance.

It is the use of extremes to prove a point. That fact that is relevant is that there are close to 400 Million guns in circulation. Less that 50 percent of the population owns a gun. About 5% of the population owns about 50% of those 400 million. So, 5% of the population (15 million people) own 200 million guns - or 15 million people own at least 15 guns each.

If you continue to refine the search, a very small percentage own hundreds of guns. And an even smaller percentage own thousands. But, they exist.

When I search for how many times have large caches of guns been found, there were 80 million hits. I didn't check all of them, I assume MOST are not relevant, most of them are duplicates, etc. But, it is NOT an isolated incident in this country.

[Madelaine Amee]

IT'S THE ASSAULT WEAPON STUPID! Nothing more/nothing less.

You can drone on all you like, but you cannot get away from the FACT that if the assault weapons were not available mass murders would be almost eliminated.

[MDLNB]

The point is to compare the US gun violence to other countries' gun violence. That's the important point.


WRONG! Comparing our country to others is comparing apples to pumpkin pie. It's about time that "some" people start looking at their own back yard instead of over the fence at other folks pastures.

We have a very large land mass.
We have a large population
We have a very liberal PC system
We have much more freedom
We are individuals, not assimilated into one mind controlled by someone else
We have a very lenient justice system
We have many, many things that other countries do not, including an inferior education system, due mainly to "open minded" or fill in the blank_____ thought process, that has taken discipline away from the parent.
I could list many reasons, but to some it will always come back to "its the guns" because they do not know jack about guns or people and their nature.

[jimjamuser]

It's cultural. No God in schools and no daddy at home. Social media and device addiction. This is the result. Narcissists willing to kill for attention..
Do you then really believe that there is MORE God and less single-parent families in Australia ,, Germany, and ALL the other world countries - because they are WAY less likely to have gun violence than the US. That theory does NOT seem to pass the logic or statistical test.

[MartinSE]

We are not talking about nukes, cruise missiles and tanks... we are talking about guns...
Disregard my point with semantics because that solves the problem under discussion?

NO, we are talking about (the post I replied to) the 2nd amendment specifically not allowing limitations or restrictions. I suggest that not allowing automatic weapons is a restriction, and if automatic weapons are allowed, then rockets should be allowed, and if rockets, then Cruise. And why not airplanes, and if airplanes why not F35s. And not allowing functional tanks is a restriction in my "right" to arm myself to take back my government with the wrong party wins the election.

My post was exactly on the topic it was replied to (if yours, I don't recall, but it was 2nd amendment and restrictions on gun ownership).

However, the constitution does not specifically say that Tanks and Warplanes are off the table. So by the recent leaked decision of the SCOTUS that rights are not rights, that are not enumerated are not rights. Therefore, there is NO restriction or limit on the right to bare arms. Seems a pretty straight forward extrapolation.

You can't have it your way, and n to allow me to have mine. If I want to own a Tank in what way does the government have the right to deny me that weapon of choice? Where does the constitution say - except for tanks.

[MDLNB]

Better to visualize a semi-automatic HIGH-VELOCITY man-KILLING rifle with a 30 round banana clip (which SHOULD be illegal) At minimum, the clip should be illegal.


I never saw a 30 round "CLIP" but I have seen a 30 round magazine. Maybe the problem is that some folks don't know anything about the subject and make decisions based on flawed information. Maybe the information regarding police response is incomplete and we just don't know the details. Maybe we know nothing about that young ADULT's parents, or enough details about his mental condition.

Any way you look at it, it was not the fault of the guns used.

Like I said before, why penalize the majority for the acts of the minority?

[MDLNB]

IT'S THE ASSAULT WEAPON STUPID! Nothing more/nothing less.

You can drone on all you like, but you cannot get away from the FACT that if the assault weapons were not available mass murders would be almost eliminated.


Assault weapons????

Is my 22cal rifle an assault weapon? I can do as much damage with it as someone with an AR-15. My rifle is not automatic, but I can buy a fully automatic BB gun that can KILL without even registering it or going through a background process.



Like I said before and will continue to repeat it, it's not the gun, it's the person. A person drives under the influence and kills someone. Do they take away everyone's cars? Perhaps the car drive can drive 200mph, so should only fast cars be taken away from everyone else?

[MartinSE]

WRONG! Comparing our country to others is comparing apples to pumpkin pie. It's about time that "some" people start looking at their own back yard instead of over the fence at other folks pastures.

We have a very large land mass.
We have a large population

If your point is population density, the US comes in around 100th place in the world. Otherwise, You will have to explain how population density or lack of it increases the number of children murdered in school.

We have a very liberal PC system
We have much more freedom


We are not even in the top 10 countries for personal freedom.


We are individuals, not assimilated into one mind controlled by someone else


I really had to pause and walk around a minute. !LOL!. Seriously, I can't even begin to estimate the thousands of times I have been told that me and people that believe like me (1/2 the population of our country) are mind controlled. Hmmm. Anyway, This goes back to the previous point you made, and which is not true, we are not even in 10th place for most personal freedom.


We have a very lenient justice system


Hmm, okay, I would say "broken" not lenient. And it is broken to favor rich white guys.


We have many, many things that other countries do not, including an inferior education system, due mainly to "open minded" or fill in the blank_____ thought process, that has taken discipline away from the parent.


You left off the "In my opinion". Many people will disagree with you - on content and causation.


I could list many reasons, but to some it will always come back to "its the guns" because they do not know jack about guns or people and their nature.

Hmm. No comment. I will have to take another vacation.

[Number 10 GI]

When you don't have access to a gun, get a knife. In China the average subject, notice I didn't say Citizen, cannot own firearms.

Outside the Americas, Knives Are Often the Weapon of Choice in Homicides
More than 130 people in Kunming, China, were injured when about ten men and women wielding knives began stabbing others at random

Outside the Americas, Knives Are Often the Weapon of Choice in Homicides | Smart News|
Smithsonian Magazine (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/outside-americas-knives-are-often-weapon-choice-homicides-180949953/)

Back in the late 80's I read a report, that I can't find now, reported there were more knife homicides in Mexico than homicides by all means (guns, knives, bludgeons, fists, feet, motor vehicles, etc.) for the same time frame in the U.S.

[MDLNB]

And at the time it was argued it was possible for a militia to use muzzle loaders to take back a rogue government.

I expect AR15's against the new XM5 will be found lacking. I expect 9MM against a M1 Abrams will be found lacking. On and On.

Are you suggesting citizens should have Cruise missiles? Why not automatic weapons? Why not F35's? After all, if the constitution - specifically the 2nd amendment - wants to be sure the populous can take back a rogue government , then it would seem to follow the citizens should be allowed to be equally armed.

Let's look at Ukraine - are we sending them civilian weapons? No, we are depleting our military arsenal because they do not have enough weapons locally capable of defending against a modern military.

So, unless you want access to Cruise, M1 Abrams, F35's and more, your argument is some what lacking.

I will completely agree there are many places in the US where a person may need a weapon to protect themselves and their loved ones. I have NO problem with that, or them. I question the need of a citizen to have 1,000 to 5,000 weapons stashed in the survival bunker. I question the need for a private citizen to own and M1 Abrams.

Do you?


When did the discussion get anywhere near what you are talking about? When did one person with something that resembled an AR-15 shooting up a school, suddenly morph into a discussion about owning a bunker full of guns or nukes?

[ThirdOfFive]

Interestingly, the fastest demographic buying firearms are women. Additionally, women make up a higher percentage seeking professional training in handling firearms. As a certified firearms instructor I am seeing this pattern. More women are also getting into the competitive shooting sports and I think that's great. I mentioned previously I'm the co-founder of the US Womens Shooting Academy. I've taken a woman who had never shot a handgun and after 7 lessons she was pulling from the holster in under a second and hitting a target at 21 feet. I will also note she didn't break a nail!
My wife and I obtained our permits-to-carry in Minnesota some 15 years ago now. My wife hadn't fired a handgun much; maybe four or five times before we took the training. Training in Minnesota at the time was one day of classroom work, followed by a half-day at the range the following day. My wife's handgun was a .38 Special Taurus with a 1 7/8" barrel. Each student was required to fire a total of 50 rounds from various ranges.

She sort of stole the show. All the macho guy types with their Glock 17s and whatever else were often wildly inaccurate, while my wife calmly put bullet after bullet into the color, many of them inside the 10 ring. I recall our instructor took a look at her target, shook his head and said "I sure as hell don't want to be standing in front of HER".

[MDLNB]

Sorry this is also a myth.

Many of the "founding fathers" were atheists. And the theists were often (mostly?) Puritans (Calvinist's and was based on the Holiness movement) that would never consider what we consider Christians to be Christians today. Women were little more than possessions, etc. Maybe you would like to start "testing" women charged with witch craft? They came here specifically to escape the Church of Englands persecution, and they could persecute anyone not toeing the line to their beliefs.

And if you want Christian beliefs in government, lets start with feeding the poor, giving housing to the homeless, forgiving those that transgress against us, not killing our enemies. You know all those pesky things Jesus told us to do, but evangelicals don't want to do, and instead refer back to the old testament and repeatedly quote the "thous shall nots" and not Jesus saying "thou shalt.

And another point, would you clarifying which Bible you want to make law, and which interpretation of it? Since there are over 200 Christian denominations in the US alone, and over 45,000 in the world.

And does the Pope get a seat in the Christian White House? After all, there are 1.5 billion Catholics and only maybe a 1/2 million Protestants (divided up between 45,000 different interpretations.)

So, I am just. curious, is it YOUR religion you want made law?

Now, could we get back to guns being used to kill children in class rooms for the past 20 years?

"Christians" make up in total about 20% of the worlds population. Yet, some how the other 80% of the world's population are not murdering their children regularly in schools. There are always the occasional wacko dictator, or rebels, or whatever that kills children or others. But, Only in America do we appear to endorse muting children in schools regularly. I say appear, since we have had 20 years to do something about it, and so far we can't agree on anything. 20 years...


Nice twist on the facts. Very articulate, but very erroneous too.

[ThirdOfFive]

That is an insidiously wrong statement pushed by some of those of the Christian faith. This country was founded by a bunch of nearly agnostic men who wanted financial and political control over this territory. They had absolutely no disagreement with England over theological concerns and in fact were far LESS religious than the monarchy which claimed to derive its legitimacy from Jesus et al.

Jefferson removed all Jesus is God references from his Bible (https://www.history.com/news/thomas-jefferson-bible-religious-beliefs#:~:text=In%20two%20volumes%2C%20The%20Phil osophy,Enlightenment%2Dera%20sense%20of%20reason.) , actually cut those passages out with a knife. Our Constitution has exactly two references to religion and both strongly state that religious affiliation has no place in our governance.

The ethic of the founders was not rigid evangelical Christianity is was instead based on liberal ideology of natural rights as proposed by Locke and others. The founders were so against religious dogma determining United States governance that they made sure the Post Office, one of the few functions of the Federal Government at the time, operated on Sunday, you know the Christian day of rest and prayer on which you shall refrain from work and keep it holy, the Post Office functioned on Sunday the same as any other day of the week.

" In 1828, the Kentucky Senator Richard M. Johnson, chairman of the Senate Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads and a devout Baptist, declared any federal attempt to give preference to the Christian Sabbath to be unconstitutional. The line between church and state when it came to Sunday mail delivery, he argued, "cannot be too strongly drawn." "

No, what has happened is that once again the real history of the US is being subverted by many who wish to believe that what they now hold true was held true in the 18th century.
Thomas Paine called Christianity a fable. Many were simply Deists (https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214), a religious belief that a God does exist but that he [or she] is not actively involved in our day to day life and that "human experience and rationality—rather than religious dogma and mystery—determine the validity of human beliefs."

That was overwhelmingly the ethic of our founders and where it overlapped with the liberal Protestantism of the day, that was ok. Real history. You can look it up.
It is pretty well accepted among academics that our system of government is based on the English system of common law, which itself is based in large part on the Judeo-Christian ethic.

[Sarah_W]

Social tensions are MUCH greater today and also other tensions. Many people have reacted to this by stockpiling many rifles and pistols designed for WAR and to kill people ( you don't buy a 30-round clip to go deer hunting). This made the people feel safer, but mainly it made the Gun Manufacturers more PROFIT and wealth. So they put out propaganda advertisements in Gun magazines and the NRA journal to induce these people to buy MORE guns. In the last 2 years, civilian gun ownership went from a high of 300 million guns to a new high of 400 million guns.
.........More readily available guns equate to MORE gun deaths and crime. To understand how big and BAD the US situation has become - you just need to look at a chart comparison showing gun deaths per 100,000 citizens for ALL the world's countries. Ry far, the US has the MOST !

I don't think anyone makes a 30 round clip. Frankly, I don't know if any modern rifles even utilize a clip.

Ironically, when Democrats start chanting about gun control the demand for guns and ammo rises dramatically. Introduce a pandemic and force people to stay home for lockdowns created the huge surge in ammo sales along with millions of first time gun buyers entering the market.

[MartinSE]

I would like to posit another point on guns. Why are illegal guns so available? Why are so many poor teens buying guns? I suggest our wonderful failure - WAR ON DRUGS. A young poor kid (not this one) looking at a life of poverty or flipping burgers and comparing that to a life with fast cars and women and all they have to do is sell drugs on street corners and get rich. The life may be short, but it will be fun!

Selling drugs provides the funds to buy these no so inexpensive guns. How many poor teens could drop out of school and buy a Luger or AR15 and ammunition? It is the street sales of illegal drugs that funds it. And the guns are simply a tool needed in that line of business.

That is the seed (root cause in my humble opinion). That then leads to all the evils we hear about is large cities - you never hear about a gang doing drive by battings.

Legalizing all drugs will eventually eliminate that entire source of funding for purchasing and using guns by teens and all the crime and deaths caused by them. And it would eliminate all the Billions of dollars we spend on the endless useless Drug War. It would eliminate a large source of income for Drug cartels.

The only down side would be addicts, and the crime, medical and other costs related to that. And other countries have shown that those costs are more than offset by taxing the drug sales.

I propose that one step in stopping gun violence would be to legalize and tax all drugs. Not perfect, it won't stop all gun violence, but I think it is pretty obvious that it would eliminate most.

[ThirdOfFive]

Social tensions are MUCH greater today and also other tensions. Many people have reacted to this by stockpiling many rifles and pistols designed for WAR and to kill people ( you don't buy a 30-round clip to go deer hunting). This made the people feel safer, but mainly it made the Gun Manufacturers more PROFIT and wealth. So they put out propaganda advertisements in Gun magazines and the NRA journal to induce these people to buy MORE guns. In the last 2 years, civilian gun ownership went from a high of 300 million guns to a new high of 400 million guns.
.........More readily available guns equate to MORE gun deaths and crime. To understand how big and BAD the US situation has become - you just need to look at a chart comparison showing gun deaths per 100,000 citizens for ALL the world's countries. Ry far, the US has the MOST !
Actually that would be Honduras, with a per-capita gun death rate of 60 per 100,000. The US rate per capita is 12.21 gun deaths per 100,000--barely 20% of that of Honduras. (World Population Review website, "Gun Deaths by Country 2022").

[MartinSE]

I don't think anyone makes a 30 round clip. Frankly, I don't know if any modern rifles even utilize a clip.

Ironically, when Democrats start chanting about gun control the demand for guns and ammo rises dramatically. Introduce a pandemic and force people to stay home for lockdowns created the huge surge in ammo sales along with millions of first time gun buyers entering the market.

Very true, when Obama was elected sales skyrocketed. And his "coming for your guns" never happened.

I will not address the "Dems" part, because, I would prefer to not take another vacation too soon. Let's just say that as a liberal democratic socialist, Dems are embarrassing to me. They say the stupidest things.

[MartinSE]

Actually that would be Honduras, with a per-capita gun death rate of 60 per 100,000. The US rate per capita is 12.21 gun deaths per 100,000--barely 20% of that of Honduras. (World Population Review website, "Gun Deaths by Country 2022").

True, "gun violence" is not our forte - well, it is sort of among 1st world countries (peers), but not worldwide.

However, we do excel at murdering our children while they learn to read.

[jimjamuser]

i suggested in previous posts that the duty of protecting our children should belong to each of the 50 states national guardsmen as outlined in the second amendment to the bill of rights.
They are already on the payroll and are fully trained in the weaponry they use. 2 guardsmen per school using metal detectors and one centralized entrance should suffice and succeed.
No supreme court battles to fight. No us vs. Them. Let's put the children first because if we don't then were putting them last.
I agree with "hardening" the schools. That would help. But, a determined mass murderer with their weapon of choice a generic AR-15 semi-auto will just switch to a church or a gathering of old people at a square for music and dancing. So, now all three of those locations (and others) should be hardened. They could also shoot up a school bus full of kids.
........It will be impossible to "harden" everything.
........so the solution comes back to the GUN........how to make only a SLOWER rate of fire weapon available in the US to CIVILIANS. Stop selling semi-auto rifles and pistols to civilians. At a minimum, make NO clips that hold more than 5 rounds. Buy them back and melt them down. Civilians should get only bolt actions - Australia and New Zealand did it. The US needs to get over its "frontier mentality" about GUNS!

[MartinSE]

It is pretty well accepted among academics that our system of government is based on the English system of common law, which itself is based in large part on the Judeo-Christian ethic.

Uh, nope, actually, the main difference between English and U.S. safeguards is that English protections rest on statute or case law and may be changed by ordinary statute, whereas U.S. safeguards are constitutional and cannot be relaxed unless the Supreme Court later reverses its interpretation or the Constitution is amended. In addition, our law is judged based on precedent and English law is based on case law. Judges in England have virtually no latitude in judgements, they must rule based on common law, here judges have a lot of latitude and arguments are mostly based on precedent of "similar" cases to determine how to apply the law. Very different.

The claim by many experts that English common law is based on Christianity is rooted in Christianity is a result of the "Church of England" (based on Catholic - without the pope) and is a major reason many people came to the US to get away from a state sponsored religion. I recommend the Patriot Papers for more details.

And I could point out many other religions that also propose "morals" and "ethics" and "laws". As has been posted, some where is religion referenced in the constitution except the prescription of the government endorsing it. In the western world Christianity has had a very dominate affect on morality and ethics. But, it is not along, and the Constitution is very clear the founders did not want religion playing a role in government.

I have NO problem with people practicing their religion, I have a lot of problem with anyone wanting ME to practice their religion.

That includes my older brother who has multiple doctorates, with his first as Doctor of Theology, and has been on multiple Presidents ethics/morality advisory counsels, including President Bush, and worked as a Southern Baptist Minister in rather large churches around the country his entire life. He KNOWS better than to "encourage" me to go to church! And he adamantly opposes any infiltration of religion into the government and will not hesitate to let you know why if you ask... LOL!

[Taltarzac725]

Second Amendment | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment)

It looks like the interpretation put on The Second Amendment by the Supreme Court has changed a lot over time.

[Sarah_W]

My wife and I obtained our permits-to-carry in Minnesota some 15 years ago now. My wife hadn't fired a handgun much; maybe four or five times before we took the training. Training in Minnesota at the time was one day of classroom work, followed by a half-day at the range the following day. My wife's handgun was a .38 Special Taurus with a 1 7/8" barrel. Each student was required to fire a total of 50 rounds from various ranges.

She sort of stole the show. All the macho guy types with their Glock 17s and whatever else were often wildly inaccurate, while my wife calmly put bullet after bullet into the color, many of them inside the 10 ring. I recall our instructor took a look at her target, shook his head and said "I sure as hell don't want to be standing in front of HER".

That's awesome! I hear a lot of men tell me how well their wives shoot. I read an NRA article discussing who is the better shooter. They interviewed a military instructor, police academy instructor and a private instructor and they were unanimous that women make the better shooter and for all of the same reasons.

[MartinSE]

That's awesome! I hear a lot of men tell me how well their wives shoot. I read an NRA article discussing who is the better shooter. They interviewed a military instructor, police academy instructor and a private instructor and they were unanimous that women make the better shooter and for all of the same reasons.

Interesting

Another interesting tidbit I have heard, and I don't know if it is true is that all mass shooting by a single shooter has been males. Maybe we should only allow females to own guns - :)

[Taltarzac725]

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller)

This might be of interest. I like the dissents in the case.

. The dissent concludes, "The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.... I could not possibly conclude that the Framers made such a choice."

[MDLNB]

Sorry this is also a myth.

Many of the "founding fathers" were atheists. And the theists were often (mostly?) Puritans (Calvinist's and was based on the Holiness movement) that would never consider what we consider Christians to be Christians today. Women were little more than possessions, etc. Maybe you would like to start "testing" women charged with witch craft? They came here specifically to escape the Church of Englands persecution, and they could persecute anyone not toeing the line to their beliefs.

And if you want Christian beliefs in government, lets start with feeding the poor, giving housing to the homeless, forgiving those that transgress against us, not killing our enemies. You know all those pesky things Jesus told us to do, but evangelicals don't want to do, and instead refer back to the old testament and repeatedly quote the "thous shall nots" and not Jesus saying "thou shalt.

And another point, would you clarifying which Bible you want to make law, and which interpretation of it? Since there are over 200 Christian denominations in the US alone, and over 45,000 in the world.

And does the Pope get a seat in the Christian White House? After all, there are 1.5 billion Catholics and only maybe a 1/2 million Protestants (divided up between 45,000 different interpretations.)

So, I am just. curious, is it YOUR religion you want made law?

Now, could we get back to guns being used to kill children in class rooms for the past 20 years?

"Christians" make up in total about 20% of the worlds population. Yet, some how the other 80% of the world's population are not murdering their children regularly in schools. There are always the occasional wacko dictator, or rebels, or whatever that kills children or others. But, Only in America do we appear to endorse muting children in schools regularly. I say appear, since we have had 20 years to do something about it, and so far we can't agree on anything. 20 years...


"Most of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Christians (54 out of 56). Twenty-seven (27) of them held theology degrees." They based the Declaration upon a greater foundational belief that God, or as written in the Declaration “Creator,” was the source for men’s irrevocable rights.


John Quincy Adams, the 6th president of the United States: “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: that it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.”

I can dig up many other examples of our country being founded on Judeo-Christian values.

This has nothing to do with the subject, but I felt compelled to respond to an opinion that was not quite factual. It's only been within the last ten years or so that the Judeo-Christian majority in America dropped below 90% of the population (according to ABC/WAPO polls.



If you wish to use Christianity as a cause of killings, why not compare it to the very large Muslim population of the world and how many they kill. You can start in some of the African nations, as an example. Let's not base reasoning and rationalization of murder upon the population of one group.



Like I said before and reiterate, guns don't kill, people kill.



The idea that guns are the reason or blame for killing is ludicrous. Millions of people own guns and have never used them against another human, let alone even pointed them at anyone. You are not going to eliminate murder, period. You can ban guns, knives, glass bottles, hammers, screw drivers, bats, axes, etc. but you will not eliminate murder. Murder comes from irrational people. People with mental defects. Until you address that, then you will always have murder.

We have had murder since the beginning of time. Live with it, but just protect yourself from being the victim.

[MartinSE]

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller)

This might be of interest. I like the dissents in the case.

Uh, yeah, considering there had just been a successful insurrection, uh, revolution, and a lot of people that were "loyalists" and if they had the ability would certainly have caused trouble for the newbies starting the new country.

There is also significant evidence that the 2nd amendment was put in to get states supporting slavery to sign on, since they wanted guns to control the slaves, and the slaves, not being humans, were not allowed to own guns, so did not benefit from the 2nd.

I expect it is HARD to KNOW what all went into the politics of forming a new country and a new form of government (sort of). I am certain there was a lot of closed door meetings and margining going on.

But, it is there, it is the law. So, since there is not a snowballs chance in hell of repealing the 2nd, we live with it.

[MDLNB]

It is the use of extremes to prove a point. That fact that is relevant is that there are close to 400 Million guns in circulation. Less that 50 percent of the population owns a gun. About 5% of the population owns about 50% of those 400 million. So, 5% of the population (15 million people) own 200 million guns - or 15 million people own at least 15 guns each.

If you continue to refine the search, a very small percentage own hundreds of guns. And an even smaller percentage own thousands. But, they exist.

When I search for how many times have large caches of guns been found, there were 80 million hits. I didn't check all of them, I assume MOST are not relevant, most of them are duplicates, etc. But, it is NOT an isolated incident in this country.


And how many of that 400 million guns have been used to kill other citizens? Should we ban all guns because a few were used in a commission of a crime? How many times were they used to save a life? That is an interesting point, because I think there have been more cases of guns saving lives than taking them in a crime. ALMOST every study conducted in America says that guns save lives in millions of incidents, vs lives lost by guns in the thousands. SO, if a hundred lives are saved compared to one life lost in gun related crimes, then the whole debate is moot.

[MartinSE]

"Most of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Christians (54 out of 56). Twenty-seven (27) of them held theology degrees." They based the Declaration upon a greater foundational belief that God, or as written in the Declaration “Creator,” was the source for men’s irrevocable rights.


Uh, two things. I can't find a single reference to support this. I have read the Patriot Papers several times (debates between them about how to form eh government and there was little to no reference to what you say) From what I can find, it appears 3 Framers were practicing Christians.

So, I call false, unless you can provide evidence.

Second. I don't care what religion or lack of it the framers practiced in their lives. They did not include it in the Constitution, the only mention of it BANS it from government. If they were practicing Christians, why would they do that? That means to me, that ANYONE promoting religion in the government is anti-constitution.

Just saying...

I will leave it to smarter people here who have already debunked this too do it again.

[MDLNB]

Uh, yeah, considering there had just been a successful insurrection, uh, revolution, and a lot of people that were "loyalists" and if they had the ability would certainly have caused trouble for the newbies starting the new country.

There is also significant evidence that the 2nd amendment was put in to get states supporting slavery to sign on, since they wanted guns to control the slaves, and the slaves, not being humans, were not allowed to own guns, so did not benefit from the 2nd.

I expect it is HARD to KNOW what all went into the politics of forming a new country and a new form of government (sort of). I am certain there was a lot of closed door meetings and margining going on.

But, it is there, it is the law. So, since there is not a snowballs chance in hell of repealing the 2nd, we live with it.


Works for me. I have enjoyed target shooting since I was a teenager and still do. And I have owned many guns in my lifetime and still do, and not one of them has gone on a killing rampage. Guess I know how to pick them, huh?

[MartinSE]

And how many of that 400 million guns have been used to kill other citizens? Should we ban all guns because a few were used in a commission of a crime? How many times were they used to save a life? That is an interesting point, because I think there have been more cases of guns saving lives than taking them in a crime. ALMOST every study conducted in America says that guns save lives in millions of incidents, vs lives lost by guns in the thousands. SO, if a hundred lives are saved compared to one life lost in gun related crimes, then the whole debate is moot.

A very small number of them. Please, since you seem obsessed with my posts, provide me with ANY example of my promoting banning all guns. Please.

How many times are they used to save a life - do you men where the person shot was trying to kill them with a bat? or a Gun? I expect most cases of self defense with gun shooting an assailant, the assailant also had a gun. So, maybe if neither had a gun, the worst that would happen is a concussion by being beaten with a bat.

Ah, finally, you get to your point, 19 children lives are an acceptable price to pay if guns can save lives too. I will be sure to let the parents know.

[MDLNB]

True, "gun violence" is not our forte - well, it is sort of among 1st world countries (peers), but not worldwide.

However, we do excel at murdering our children while they learn to read.


But a lot more murdered before born. Oh well, guess that doesn't concern anyone, right?

[jimjamuser]

How many cars have been used to murder children in their classrooms at school?

I wait while you look up the answer since you seem to think this post will contribute to saving children lives.

It seems almost every week another shooting kills more kids, and what do we have to offer as a sign to the parents that we care at all? Sarcasm? Children are dying. They are being murdered. Can we please argue about the color of peoples skin, or the cause of poverty, or wars, or stupid politicians, and for the sake of our children TRY to find something that will HELP. Not SOVLE, just help.

The greatest country on earth and we can't even set aside politics long enough to TRY and find a way to reduce the number of kids being murdered.
One question to be asked, "is the US STILL the greatest country?" It was at least in the top ten after WWW2. But today, when you look at comparative lists of countries, you find that we are # 1 in gun violence and deaths.......that's not too wonderful. We are about 30th in the factor called ......upward mobility - the UK is about 10th. And we are #1 in wealth disparity. Please check the other factors on the country comparisons list. You might not go away thinking "greatest country". I really WISH that it was!
..........think about how factors like extreme wealth disparity intensify the propensity for some marginal male youth to see GUNS and violence as an easy and thrilling way to improve their life. They might join forces in a gang or they could go crazy and individually just kill adults and children as punishment for THEIR dead-end lives.
.........Many young males (in every country, not just the US) feel like they are swimming upstream in an environment that HATES them and one where they can NEVER succeed. In the US they have the greatest access to semi-auto weapons of war than any other country so we have the greatest amount of mass murders.

[MrFlorida]

Kids today are desensitized with all the violence in the movies, and on video games. It's no wonder they are all messed up and prone to violence. If you don't believe me, watch your grand kids video games...

[MartinSE]

Works for me. I have enjoyed target shooting since I was a teenager and still do. And I have owned many guns in my lifetime and still do, and not one of them has gone on a killing rampage. Guess I know how to pick them, huh?

Agreed, and the vast majority of gun owners are responsible - like you. Thank you.

[MDLNB]

A very small number of them. Please, since you seem obsessed with my posts, provide me with ANY example of my promoting banning all guns. Please.

How many times are they used to save a life - do you men where the person shot was trying to kill them with a bat? or a Gun? I expect most cases of self defense with gun shooting an assailant, the assailant also had a gun. So, maybe if neither had a gun, the worst that would happen is a concussion by being beaten with a bat.

Ah, finally, you get to your point, 19 children lives are an acceptable price to pay if guns can save lives too. I will be sure to let the parents know.


Just enjoying a civil conversation with an intelligent person, NOT "obsessed."

I don't believe I indicated that you wished to ban all guns, did I? If so, my mistake.
No, I do not believe that 19 children's' lives justify gun ownership, and I don't believe that I suggested that, did I? But, please DO give them my condolences since you plan on contacting them. Thank you.

Not sure where you get the idea that "the worst that would happen is a concussion by being beaten by a bat." I guess that unlike me, you may not have law enforcement experience and know that a bat or club has been the cause of many murders. I believe that death trumps concussion, right? Personally, if someone came at me with a bat, I too would use lethal force to protect myself. I am not as young as I used to be and not quite up to fighting bare hands against a bat wielding assailant. Fortunately, the law allows for self defense, still.

[MartinSE]

///

[MartinSE]

Just enjoying a civil conversation with an intelligent person, NOT "obsessed."

I don't believe I indicated that you wished to ban all guns, did I? If so, my mistake.
No, I do not believe that 19 children's' lives justify gun ownership, and I don't believe that I suggested that, did I? But, please DO give them my condolences since you plan on contacting them. Thank you.

Not sure where you get the idea that "the worst that would happen is a concussion by being beaten by a bat." I guess that unlike me, you may not have law enforcement experience and know that a bat or club has been the cause of many murders. I believe that death trumps concussion, right? Personally, if someone came at me with a bat, I too would use lethal force to protect myself. I am not as young as I used to be and not quite up to fighting bare hands against a bat wielding assailant. Fortunately, the law allows for self defense, still.

No, I don't have law enforcement, unless you consider the Marines qualifications.

And yes, I am CERTAIN you can kill a person with a bat, but the more likely outcome is someone is unconscious. Please explain how a person with a bat can kill two teachers and 19 children in 2 minutes? I expect it can happen, but it is SO much easier with a semiautomatic weapon. As I have said over and over, guns don't kill people, guns facilitate it.

[Keefelane66]

I feel so much safer the states are ATTEMPTING to ban birth control and IUD’s than regulating guns!

[MDLNB]

One question to be asked, "is the US STILL the greatest country?" It was at least in the top ten after WWW2. But today, when you look at comparative lists of countries, you find that we are # 1 in gun violence and deaths.......that's not too wonderful. We are about 30th in the factor called ......upward mobility - the UK is about 10th. And we are #1 in wealth disparity. Please check the other factors on the country comparisons list. You might not go away thinking "greatest country". I really WISH that it was!
..........think about how factors like extreme wealth disparity intensify the propensity for some marginal male youth to see GUNS and violence as an easy and thrilling way to improve their life. They might join forces in a gang or they could go crazy and individually just kill adults and children as punishment for THEIR dead-end lives.
.........Many young males (in every country, not just the US) feel like they are swimming upstream in an environment that HATES them and one where they can NEVER succeed. In the US they have the greatest access to semi-auto weapons of war than any other country so we have the greatest amount of mass murders.


Taking all of what you said at face value, as being possibly being accurate to an extent, I suggest something that many should consider. Instead of comparing stats, try comparing lifestyles of the different countries compared to ours. And I am not attempting to belittle these tragedies by saying they are minor compared to other causes of deaths in our country. Our lifestyle, even at what is considered poverty level is better than most European or other countries. Our poverty level families live as well as many middle class families in other countries. Just pointing out what I have personally observed living most of my life overseas.

"Extreme wealth disparity" is a myth used by a few for other purposes that I can't say on here without being punished. We have a greater opportunity to succeed in this country than anywhere else. The only excuse is self inflicted lack of motivation to excel.

In my opinion (and I know I will be corrected if thought wrong) one reason for such violence and lack of respect for others is that many young folks are not busy or occupied enough. Growing up, my generation mostly worked in some manner. We had paper routes, mowed lawns, collected refundable sofa bottle deposits, washed cars, pulled weeds, lemonade stands, harvested tobacco, or other crops, etc. When we were young, you could get a paying job at age 14 with a workers permit in my state. Keeping kids busy gives them self-respect and their mind focused on goals.

Of course, there has always been violence in the world, ever since Cain and Able.

[biker1]

Which states are attempting to ban birth control?


I feel so much safer the states are ATTEMPTING to ban birth control and IUD’s than regulating guns!

[jimjamuser]

One question to be asked, "is the US STILL the greatest country?" It was at least in the top ten after WWW2. But today, when you look at comparative lists of countries, you find that we are # 1 in gun violence and deaths.......that's not too wonderful. We are about 30th in the factor called ......upward mobility - the UK is about 10th. And we are #1 in wealth disparity. Please check the other factors on the country comparisons list. You might not go away thinking "greatest country". I really WISH that it was!
..........think about how factors like extreme wealth disparity intensify the propensity for some marginal male youth to see GUNS and violence as an easy and thrilling way to improve their life. They might join forces in a gang or they could go crazy and individually just kill adults and children as punishment for THEIR dead-end lives.
.........Many young males (in every country, not just the US) feel like they are swimming upstream in an environment that HATES them and one where they can NEVER succeed. In the US they have the greatest access to semi-auto weapons of war than any other country so we have the greatest amount of mass murders.
Another question to be asked, "Is the US moving toward BEING a 3rd world country". There are signs that the US is moving that way. One sign is the extreme wealth disparity similar to a country like Honduras. The wealth disparity sucks the relative wealth from the US middle-class when situations like middle-class protection factors such as labor unions are eliminated and Congress passes tax legislation by wealthy people to benefit WEALTHY people.
..........Canada is SO worried about changes in the US that they have done studies to protect Canadians from problems caused by their Southern Neighbor. They would NOT have been that worried 10 years ago.
.......If the US changes toward being more of a 3rd world country, there would be MORE frustrated young males contemplating Mass Murder, not LESS !

[Keefelane66]

Which states are attempting to ban birth control?
A state-by-state breakdown of how Republicans plan to attack reproductive healthcare (https://www.mic.com/impact/how-republicans-plan-to-restrict-abortion-birth-control/amp)

[MartinSE]

One question to be asked, "is the US STILL the greatest country?" It was at least in the top ten after WWW2. But today, when you look at comparative lists of countries, you find that we are # 1 in gun violence and deaths.......that's not too wonderful. We are about 30th in the factor called ......upward mobility - the UK is about 10th. And we are #1 in wealth disparity. Please check the other factors on the country comparisons list. You might not go away thinking "greatest country". I really WISH that it was!
..........think about how factors like extreme wealth disparity intensify the propensity for some marginal male youth to see GUNS and violence as an easy and thrilling way to improve their life. They might join forces in a gang or they could go crazy and individually just kill adults and children as punishment for THEIR dead-end lives.
.........Many young males (in every country, not just the US) feel like they are swimming upstream in an environment that HATES them and one where they can NEVER succeed. In the US they have the greatest access to semi-auto weapons of war than any other country so we have the greatest amount of mass murders.

I agree with your assessment. My "greatest country in the world" was sarcasm, no doubt lost of those that think it is.

The list of things we have fallen out of first place in is much longer than your list. But, this thread is about the one there is no second place - we are first in having our children murdered while learning to read.

[MartinSE]

Kids today are desensitized with all the violence in the movies, and on video games. It's no wonder they are all messed up and prone to violence. If you don't believe me, watch your grand kids video games...

Once again, there is a wide world out there, with 94% of the worlds population and many of those (most?) play violent video games and watch all the same movies. NO other country murders its children regularly while they are trying to learn to read.

And I still play my grandkids video games and usually beat them. Did you grow up with the Three Stooges? Do you hit you friends in the head with a Hamer, poke them in the eyes with your fingers? Did you watch cowboy shows? Do kill Indians when you see them coming? On and on. We grew up in a very violent era. Cartoons glorified murder, dropping safes on peoples heads was "funny".

[Two Bills]

The Judge is on His throne and we will all stand before Him one day. Things would be a whole lot different if the Holy Bible were once again used as a text book in our school rooms.

If they can get enough Bibles into the schools, maybe the kids could shelter behind a pile of them when the gunman calls.
Bibles and prayers haven't saved a kid yet!

[MartinSE]

If they can get enough Bibles into the schools, maybe the kids could shelter behind a pile of them when the gunman calls.
Bibles and prayers haven't saved a kid yet!

Agree.

I grew up in a bible thumping Southern Baptist home. I even preached at our church one summer while my brother, the then interim pastor was out of town. And look at the mess I turned into... didn't stick with me - LOL!

[jimjamuser]

The Judge is on His throne and we will all stand before Him one day. Things would be a whole lot different if the Holy Bible were once again used as a text book in our school rooms.
Religiousity is not going to solve the problems in this situation. The US long ago agreed to separate church and state. Let's retain that because it worked.

[MartinSE]

Religiousity is not going to solve the problems in this situation. The US long ago agreed to separate church and state. Let's retain that because it worked.

I think the appropriate meme in this case is, if someone has a hammer, everything looks like a nail. (not you, the post you are replying to)

[jimjamuser]

defund the C I A
Investigate the psychotropic drugs the mass shooters are taking.
I fail to see coherence here. Possibly humor? Like bad humor? Like a bad poetry Sat night live skit?

[jimjamuser]

That's your opinion. The facts show that the less guns, the less gun-related deaths.
Agreed.

[jimjamuser]

no, but that's a whole other can of worms. the cruelty involved in these sanitariums were inhumane, certainly, but the solution to simply release them is insane. if this is how things are in the US today, the ONLY thing that will stop this is security. no unauthorized personnel allowed with verification. we had to do it @ my kid's high school, was no big thing. you ring a bell, the camera sees who you are, & office staff buzz you in. not perfect, but it was a start
Mental institutes were closed in about the early eighties in order to keep property and other taxes low for the benefit of rich taxpayers. Just threw them out on the street. What could POSSIBLY go wrong???????

[jimjamuser]

Whose bible do you think we should use for indoctrinating our children? And lets not talk about the awesome success of Theocracies in solving violence - does the inquisition, or the Crusades bring anything to mind? Mass murdering and torture.

If you want to practice religious beliefs, I am 100% in favor of that If you want to force me and my children to practice YOUR religious beliefs - how is that freedom of speech? How is that freedom of Religion?

The problem is MAN MADE, and the solution will be MAN MADE.
Someone said that religion has caused most of the wars in the world.

[jimjamuser]

an added thought: what about the case of sandy hook? the kid was obvious unbalanced just by looking @ him, but his mother bought them for him, as gifts, yet! how do we begin to control THAT? she even took him target shooting!
If she could have ONLY legally purchased a bolt action or single-shot rifle he could have killed fewer children before he was overpowered!

[jimjamuser]

Texas lawmen, Big hats, Big boots, Big swagger , Big nothing, they had to wait till they had an army , when as soon as the first law men on the grounds should have been banging at that door not waiting for help
Maybe all of today's Texans have lost the spirit of "Remember the Alamo".

[jimjamuser]

"Those who give up a little freedom for a little security shall lose both--and deserve neither". (Benjamin Franklin--allegedly)
i guess that I am confused. Have Australia and New Zealand been taken over by Russia or China? Why wasn't I informed of this?

[Taltarzac725]

Maybe all of today's Texans have lost the spirit of "Remember the Alamo".

Two cannons played a big role in the victory at San Jacinto. Battle of San Jacinto - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_San_Jacinto)

NEWS (https://cemetery.tspb.texas.gov/news.asp?newsid=9262)

Who were the famous Twin Sisters and what happened to them after the Battle of San Jacinto? | Historic Houston: (http://historichouston1836.com/who-were-the-famous-twin-sisters-and-what-happened-to-them-after-the-battle-of-san-jacinto/)

[MartinSE]

Someone said that religion has caused most of the wars in the world.

I have heard that, and the other all the wars were about money. I don't know. Personally I am on the side of powerful people getting less powerful people to go murder other people. I think it is sometimes for "god" and sometimes the other "god" - money/power.

I think George Carlin said something about do you believe in my god - no? Bang you are dead as the basis for most wars.

[MartinSE]

On another note about this school shooting, I see students that are too young to vote are walking out of schools across the country in protest. Good for them!

[Two Bills]

Maybe all of today's Texans have lost the spirit of "Remember the Alamo".

From what I can see, most present day 'Texans' were on the other side at the Alamo!

[MartinSE]

///

[jimjamuser]

And that country would be overrun and taken over by men with guns. Majority of women are motherly and can not do what has to be done for protection of All. Now I agree for few cold blooded killers, but most are what we think of—- moms, nice, warm, and nurturing.
Women fight alongside men in the Israel Army and as Top Gun pilots in the US Air Farce.
........The idea of women being allowed to own guns and NOT men was more of a hypothetical thought experiment than any suggestion of reality. The only important idea was that from a STATISTICAL standpoint women are involved in almost zero mass murders as compared to men ( and adrenaline-fueled YOUNG men mostly).
.........I found the idea interesting (even though not practical) because my opinion of the main cause of US mass murders is based on STATISTICAL comparisons of all countries in the world. Which leads to easy GUN availability being said cause.

[MartinSE]

Which leads to easy GUN availability being said cause.

I agree it is at least A cause. Whether it is the root cause, I don't know. I think the root cause is more like cultural. Where we used to have a thriving middle class, and people (my parents and grand parents) were obsessed with working hard so I could have a better life than they did. There was a sense of manifest destiny and it seemed even politicians worked together and worked out their disagreements.

Somewhere along the way, we lost our dream. Making money became the preferred religion and everyone was "out for themselves. From there we have just spiraled downhill. I think the violence is just frustration and anger expressing itself.

We began our long list of "wars" - war on drugs, war on poverty, war on whatever the current thing someone wants to pour our tax dollars into and the only qualification was you had to guarantee to need MORE money if you want to get the grant.

[jimjamuser]

You can blame the libs on this one. It's NOT the guns that kill, it's the people and/or nut jobs behind them. I'm sick of "mental health" calling. These kind of people need long, long prison terms but they don't want to do that. It's like revolving door prison reform for them. At least this person was killed and taxpayers don't have to waste anymore money on him. It was shameful what Beto did in the TV conference with the grieving families in the audience and he's trying to grandstand for his own benefit. What a loser! Why anyone would vote for something as callous as he is beyond my comprehension. Such a tragic ordeal but, once again, you can't blame the guns!
Beto O'rourke just asked the right questions. Because the Texas governor was avoiding talking about ease of GUN availability. It was supposed to be a problem-solving address and citizen meeting.

[MDLNB]

Uh, two things. I can't find a single reference to support this. I have read the Patriot Papers several times (debates between them about how to form eh government and there was little to no reference to what you say) From what I can find, it appears 3 Framers were practicing Christians.

So, I call false, unless you can provide evidence.

Second. I don't care what religion or lack of it the framers practiced in their lives. They did not include it in the Constitution, the only mention of it BANS it from government. If they were practicing Christians, why would they do that? That means to me, that ANYONE promoting religion in the government is anti-constitution.

Just saying...

I will leave it to smarter people here who have already debunked this too do it again.


I see, if you can't find it, then it's false?

Show me where in the Constitution it "BANS" religion from the government. Maybe you read it differently? It "bans" the establishment of a gov based religion or the free exercise of it. Guess someone missed the part where Congress starts their session with a prayer. But, that don't count, right?

It is not the Constitution that bans religion from anything. It was uncomfortable powers that be that continue to ban religion from everything. Not going any further because I do not wish to have my "thoughts" misconstrued and get punished on here.

[MDLNB]

Beto O'rourke just asked the right questions. Because the Texas governor was avoiding talking about ease of GUN availability. It was supposed to be a problem-solving address and citizen meeting.


Beto was totally out of line.

[MartinSE]

Beto O'rourke just asked the right questions. Because the Texas governor was avoiding talking about ease of GUN availability. It was supposed to be a problem-solving address and citizen meeting.

whoops, sorry, that got too political fast. I had to remove it.
////
I agree.

[Scbang]

If restricting gun ownership is the answer to gun violence, why is it that the states/cities with the strictest gun control laws have the highest gun related violence? Does anyone REALLY think that by eliminating gun sales to honest, decent citizens we are going to eliminate gun related violence? Does making marijuana illegal actually keep folks from obtaining marijuana? Yes, decent law abiding folks will not have guns, but is that what you really want? I don't know the stats on gun ownership to gun crime, but I would suggest that over all, it has to be pretty low. If there really is over 300 million guns owned in America, then the gun crime to gun ownership is pretty low. So, do we penalize decent folks because of a very minute amount of lawlessness related to possession of guns? How about we ban automobiles because a very few car owners drive under the influence? Take all cars away from decent folks. How about banning all alcohol sales because a very few abusers drive under the influence? Oh yeah, that was tried already and how did that work? Maybe we should make laws that prohibit murder....oh...right....done that.
Now, we get to the common argument that will undoubtedly come up (as always) about rate of fire. "Oh, but a semiautomatic firearm can kill lots of people." Yep, but so can a bomb, so can poisonous gas, and so can a truck or car. Do we penalize the majority for the actions of the minority? Like someone else said, how many murders by firearm in the Villages?
Take away the cause, not the method.

OK then, why are we not allowed M50 machine gun? It's just another method of killing.

Sad

[MartinSE]

I see, if you can't find it, then it's false?

Show me where in the Constitution it "BANS" religion from the government. Maybe you read it differently? It "bans" the establishment of a gov based religion or the free exercise of it. Guess someone missed the part where Congress starts their session with a prayer. But, that don't count, right?

It is not the Constitution that bans religion from anything. It was uncomfortable powers that be that continue to ban religion from everything. Not going any further because I do not wish to have my "thoughts" misconstrued and get punished on here.

I have no idea what you mean by, "if you can't find it is must be false." I didn't say I couldn't find anything, I said I wasn't going to bother finding it, since it has been proven false so many times - even a couple posts in this thread.

Wrong, it bans the establishment of a preferred religion. Someone must have read it wrong. And yes, there are people like me that lobby for the opening pray to be discontinued. Since I don't recall any Jewish Rabi, or Muslims ever holding the office of Senate Chaplin, hence the use of "Christian" Chaplins is enduring a specific religion.

[Scbang]

Guns do not shot themselves...

Very true. But if no gun, no shooting, no killing at least not as many nor as fast.

[MartinSE]

OK then, why are we not allowed M50 machine gun? It's just another method of killing.

Sad

You think so small - why not an M1 Abrams. (sarcasm/joke)

The Argument that the 2nd amendment is intended to allow citizens to take back a rogue government would require that the citizens be as well equipped as the government.

And no where does the constitution list any limitations on the weapons we are Allowed to have, so according to the recent SCOTUS leaked decision on abortions not being as an enumerated right - so it isn't covered, I can only assume ANYTHING not mentioned in the constitution is not covered.

I want my M1 Abrams NOW. and I think I will take a few Cruise missiles to go along with it.

[Scbang]

Guns cant shot them selves some one has too pull the trigger. Take away guns -if they want to kill they do so another way , baseball bats, cars knives . anything/. We had a killer drive into a parade, In New york they push you in front of a on coming train. We need to have stable families and teach respect. Bring GOD back into the schoo;ws

Yes you can not stop all the killings but why do we make it so easy to kill so many so fast?

Sad

[MDLNB]

Women fight alongside men in the Israel Army and as Top Gun pilots in the US Air Farce.
........The idea of women being allowed to own guns and NOT men was more of a hypothetical thought experiment than any suggestion of reality. The only important idea was that from a STATISTICAL standpoint women are involved in almost zero mass murders as compared to men ( and adrenaline-fueled YOUNG men mostly).
.........I found the idea interesting (even though not practical) because my opinion of the main cause of US mass murders is based on STATISTICAL comparisons of all countries in the world. Which leads to easy GUN availability being said cause.


Interesting that cities with the strictest of gun control laws, have the highest violations. But, that has been repeated consistently and there is always an excuse. We can't stop the use of drugs, so let's make them legal. Easier that way. So, stopping the sale of guns and banning them will miraculously make them go away. I think that only works with good, law abiding citizens, not the bad guy.

No one considers the fact that banning guns, just increases more crime. If you can't purchase a gun, then someone will "print" one out. Guess what? No serial number for tracking.

Heaven help us if someone actually suggested enforcing existing laws and THEN executing those penalties associated with said violations. But no, we can't have these fine young individuals sitting in jail. It might hurt their self esteem.

You will always have evil and you will always have violence. Even deterrents won't stop that fact. It may keep the lesser focused upon evil from committing to their nefarious ways, but you will always have mentally disturbed that will slip through the system. It's a shame, but it will always happen. And don't bother telling me that other countries don't have crime. They all do. Some focus on punishment or treatment. Ever been to a place of confinement in Turkey? You do not want to be confined there. Want to visit the jails of Mexico? Not quite the holiday of choice.

A gun ban only makes criminals of decent citizens. Buy back all the guns you want, but I bet you won't see one AR-15, Kimble pistol or any other expensive guns in the buy back bin.

Good luck on your gun free country fantasy, folks.

[Stu from NYC]

Interesting that cities with the strictest of gun control laws, have the highest violations. But, that has been repeated consistently and there is always an excuse. We can't stop the use of drugs, so let's make them legal. Easier that way. So, stopping the sale of guns and banning them will miraculously make them go away. I think that only works with good, law abiding citizens, not the bad guy.

No one considers the fact that banning guns, just increases more crime. If you can't purchase a gun, then someone will "print" one out. Guess what? No serial number for tracking.

Heaven help us if someone actually suggested enforcing existing laws and THEN executing those penalties associated with said violations. But no, we can't have these fine young individuals sitting in jail. It might hurt their self esteem.

You will always have evil and you will always have violence. Even deterrents won't stop that fact. It may keep the lesser focused upon evil from committing to their nefarious ways, but you will always have mentally disturbed that will slip through the system. It's a shame, but it will always happen. And don't bother telling me that other countries don't have crime. They all do. Some focus on punishment or treatment. Ever been to a place of confinement in Turkey? You do not want to be confined there. Want to visit the jails of Mexico? Not quite the holiday of choice.

A gun ban only makes criminals of decent citizens. Buy back all the guns you want, but I bet you won't see one AR-15, Kimble pistol or any other expensive guns in the buy back bin.

Good luck on your gun free country fantasy, folks.

Sad that there is no good answer to this other than better protection of our children.

[MDLNB]

I have no idea what you mean by, "if you can't find it is must be false." I didn't say I couldn't find anything, I said I wasn't going to bother finding it, since it has been proven false so many times - even a couple posts in this thread.

Wrong, it bans the establishment of a preferred religion. Someone must have read it wrong. And yes, there are people like me that lobby for the opening pray to be discontinued. Since I don't recall any Jewish Rabi, or Muslims ever holding the office of Senate Chaplin, hence the use of "Christian" Chaplins is enduring a specific religion.


No, you said that since you couldn't prove (or wouldn't prove me wrong) on the founding fathers being Christian than you consider it false.

And I think you had better go back and read the First Amendment over. It says nothing of "preferred."

[MartinSE]

Interesting that cities with the strictest of gun control laws, have the highest violations. But, that has been repeated consistently and there is always an excuse. We can't stop the use of drugs, so let's make them legal. Easier that way. So, stopping the sale of guns and banning them will miraculously make them go away. I think that only works with good, law abiding citizens, not the bad guy.

No one considers the fact that banning guns, just increases more crime. If you can't purchase a gun, then someone will "print" one out. Guess what? No serial number for tracking.

Heaven help us if someone actually suggested enforcing existing laws and THEN executing those penalties associated with said violations. But no, we can't have these fine young individuals sitting in jail. It might hurt their self esteem.

You will always have evil and you will always have violence. Even deterrents won't stop that fact. It may keep the lesser focused upon evil from committing to their nefarious ways, but you will always have mentally disturbed that will slip through the system. It's a shame, but it will always happen. And don't bother telling me that other countries don't have crime. They all do. Some focus on punishment or treatment. Ever been to a place of confinement in Turkey? You do not want to be confined there. Want to visit the jails of Mexico? Not quite the holiday of choice.

A gun ban only makes criminals of decent citizens. Buy back all the guns you want, but I bet you won't see one AR-15, Kimble pistol or any other expensive guns in the buy back bin.

Good luck on your gun free country fantasy, folks.

Okay, so around and around - please show ANY post by ANYONE in this 30+ page thread that is pushing banning all guns. ANYONE.

You keep repeating that.

I see people asking for suggestions.
I see people suggesting some restrictions.
I see some people wanting to ban some types of guns.

So, I will check back to see the post number that you can provide that someone said the only solution, the desired solution, or the suggested SOLUTION is to ban all guns.

[Scbang]

We geezers certainly do have all the answers--even if most of those answers contradict the answers of others. But not only do we solve nothing, for the most part we cannot even really define the problem. Mostly we just fall back on our prejudices.

Sometimes it pays to get closer to the source. I had a conversation with my granddaughter some time ago, really about social skills but applicable here too. Her statement? "The reason that so many people of my generation are such total losers socially is because they never really learned HOW. Their "socialization" is social media".

That deserves some careful pondering, from a couple of aspects. Social media in some part (large part?) has become a surrogate parent to kids since--oh--the mid 1990s or so. A kid behind a screen can be anything he or she wants to be, and convince others that he is who he portrays himself as being. He's rarely if ever in personal contact with many of those online "friends" so he doesn't worry too much about being outed as a phony. His world probably--and social life certainly--are words on a screen. Personally he may be someone who other kids pick on, or who lags behind in school, or whatever. But he doesn't have the social skills to deal with those issues in person, so he just hides from them while building up his social media persona.

Couple that with the fact that no matter how far out or bizarre someone's ideas are, he or she can find uncountable sources on the internet that agree with his ideas. He doesn't discuss them in person with the people he encounters in daily life but he DOES discuss them with like-minded people on social media. He's not looking for information so much as validation (a common problem, even among us geezers), and he finds it. Doesn't matter how far out. The world is flat--people of one religion drink the blood of the children of another--One race will eliminate another race unless people who believe like HE believes intervene, etc. etc. His socialization is mainly with people with beliefs equally or even more bizarre than his. The REAL world--the world of face-to-face interactions with peers, practicing the skills needed to get along in daily life, knowing what to say and what not to say, becomes less and less important. It is a bad confluence of negativity. It is a bomb, in some cases, primed to go off.

Okay. Factor #2. A kid growing up in America today is taught to FEAR guns. Guns are EEEEEEVIL. Guns are SCARY. Only BAD people have guns. He hears it (if he hears anything) incessantly about it in school. So--here we have an insecure, alienated kid, saturated with bizarre ideas, who buys, borrows or steals a gun. His online persona portrays him as a swaggering bad guy. He takes the gun and becomes that guy. Maybe he only wants to scare people (how many kids bring guns to school just to show other kids?). Maybe his bizarre ideas and viewpoints dictate that violence is the answer to whatever his twisted mind tells him the problem happens to be.

And the bomb goes off.

It is no coincidence that the rise in these school shootings parallels the rise in social media usage, and even more precisely, the lack of effective parenting in lieu of the kid living on social media. They're not taught much else--at least not much else that sticks. An alienated kid or young adult filled with bizarre ideas is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And in all too many cases, it does.

Okay. Even if the admittedly-dramatized scenario above is largely true (and I believe, generally, that it is) just knowing it does not solve the problem. It all goes back to the parents BEING parents, teaching their kids proper socialization and just plain HUMAN interaction, and monitoring the poison that they all too often find on the internet. Banning or limiting guns is not the answer (though I believe that there are a lot of things we can do to minimize the possibility of school shootings). It will probably take as long to fix this problem as it did to create it in the first place. But until we fix the FAMILIES, this problem will remain.

I absolutely agree with your observation. Only problem is that your observation is applicable to most of other developed countries and they don't have same mass shooting problem like us. What don't they have? GUNS..

SAD

[Scbang]

Almost nothing you posted applies to me or my family. I seriously doubt it applies to most families.

I do not accept your daughter as a expert in the problems of America. Sorry, but you start saying how people are just expressing their opinions and then expressed yours and your daughters (and you seemed to present your daughter as a expert witness in sociology.

And, I would suggest that social media, video games, et al, are just as prevalent around the world as they are here, yet, 4% of worlds population accounts for 99.9% of the class room murders.

If you want an opinion, the gun rights argument is the root of the problem. It is used to scare gun owners into hating people that want to stop th murder children. Listening to the "gun rights" extremists, it seems they don't think children live are as important as shooting deer or blowing up water melons.

Now, that was OVER THE TOP on my part. Which I did very intentionally to explain why people that want to solve the problem are so frustrated.

Imagine, mass murders will just take cars and drive then into the school to kill children if that is what they want to do.

And how many times mass murdering by car happened?

SAD