Another mass shooting g

[jimjamuser]

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.
Shooting deer and shooting watermelons or punching holes in paper are all OK gun activities with me. And protecting your home and castle. I draw the line at mass murder of human beings with GUNS designed mainly to kill human beings. Those guns are low recoil, 22 caliber, high velocity, high magazine capacity, and military-style rifles.
.......Government tyranny can best be prevented by votes, not bullets. And if that need ever EVEN happened, it could be stopped just as well with bolt action and single-shot rifles.
.........Australia and New Zealand will NOT FALL to government tyranny just because they don't want semi-automatics in the hands of civilians.

[Scbang]

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.

Good luck defending yourself against F-35 with laser guided missiles..

SAD

[MartinSE]

And how many times mass murdering by car happened?

SAD

I know of one. But my post was sarcastic. With the intention that it would prove difficult to get the car into the school hallway to then somehow get it into the class. But, I am sure the mentally ill people will find a way, just because...

[jimjamuser]

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.
The we are not like Australia, Sweden, and etc.........that part sounds like some kind of "American Exceptionalism" rant to me. All those countries mentioned have stronger middle classes than the US does today. We have the largest wealth disparity of all the 1st world countries. I guess that is some sort of "American Exceptionalism".
........And the US economic realities lead to social dysfunction and even to such extremes of Mass Murder - because there is little money set aside for mental health and other social programs as in other countries. Texas recently lowered their budget for mental health. Is Texas actively trying to produce MORE mass murderers?

[jimjamuser]

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!
Agreed.

[Scbang]

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?

Don't you buy any insurance? Don't you stop at STOP sign? COVID vaccine?

SAD

[jimjamuser]

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!
I remember about 10 years back, a lot of women taking Karate Classes - many because husbands or boyfriends had physically threatened them. Many became very proficient. I am 100% for anything that brings women up to full equality status with men. And in many countries, there are laws that women must be paid equally as men doing the same job.
.........Women taking gun proficiency and safety classes are a good thing. I would be OK with a government program to pay for such training. Equal power should increase social stability. Women should not have to feel preyed upon in any situation.

[jimjamuser]

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.
Agreed! Kudos!

[jimjamuser]

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.
Sorry, we don't have MORE FREEDOM than Australia, Sweden, or many other countries. In fact, we have the world's GREATEST wealth disparity. It's OK to be proud of your country and love your country. But, it is also good to be realistic and note the country's warts, problems, and weaknesses.

[jimjamuser]

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?
Clip.....magazine ..........Potato Pa tah to......big deal. I know the technical difference. But clip and magazine are basically interchangeable terms to the average person. Plus clip is quicker to type.
..........People should try and focus in on the main point of a post - not try to point out minor flaws.

[jebartle]

Beto was totally out of line.

Sometimes our leaders??? Need to be questioned!!!!!

[MartinSE]

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."

I believe I said "wouldn't" and followed in the same post with because it has already been proven/answered many times. So, if you wanted to prove itI would be open to looking at your proof, but as far I I was concerned credible sources had already adequately answer the question and I was not going to waste my time research yet another of your claims.

[Sarah_W]

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.

I think it's important to look at our history prior to 1787 and what led up to the writing of the Constitution. Arguably the path was set with the Stamp Act of 1765, converging in Concord and Lexington in 1775 as the British moved to disarm Americans. Our Revolutionary War lasted 8 years and they were very hard desperate years. As Patrick Henry famously said, "I know not what path others may take, but for me, give me Liberty or give me Death.". That sentence sums up our quest for Independence and self-determination. John Dickinson's name has been lost to history for most Americans, but his importance for his time can't be understated. He wrote the grievances to King George, which are delineated in our Declaration of Independence, as well as the Articles of Confederation. But, after eight years of governing this new nation under the Articles it was clear it didn't work and needed to be fixed.

In 1787, 12 of the 13 states sent delegates to Philadelphia with one directive, fix the Articles. It was clear they were not authorized to do anything else. The debates ensued and it didn't take long for them to recognize that the Articles were not salvageable. The debates continued and they drafted the Constitution. Individual citizens Rights were not included.

I think the heart of the matter, when it comes to the Bill of Rights, comes to Federalism versus Anti-Federalism. I can really appreciate that they were able to work together to create our Freedom documents. I think we can all understand that surviving eight years of war with the most powerful government and most powerful military of their time might leave them resistant to create another government that might oppress them some day (Anti-Federalists). We can also understand the need of having a strong government and global presence (Federalists). The leading Federalists, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, John Adams and more did not want a Bill of Rights. Anti-Federalists, Patrick Henry, Daniel Webster, Thomas Jefferson, did not want a strong central government and fought for a Bill of Rights to be included.

It is not difficult to get into the hearts and minds of our Founding Fathers. So much of it is documented. James Madison knew they were doing historic work and transcribed all of their debates. They can be read in a bound book that is 600 type written pages. There are other books on the debates. We have the writings of John Dickinson, Joseph Story, Daniel Webster and so many more. Between 1776 and 1826, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson wrote 1,250 letters to each other. Today that is three volumes.

Knowing that their government sought to disarm them; knowing that they fought eight long years against their government for Independence from oppressive government agendas; and knowing that absolute power corrupts absolutely, I understand the need to enshrine certain Rights with the goal of never having the same oppression. It was required that all 13 states ratify the new Constitution and it took 10 of 13 to pass the Amendments. The Framers heard the message loud and clear that it would not get ratified if the Individual Rights were not included. Madison presented 19 Amendment to the House, to appease the Anti-Federalists. The House presented 17 Amendments to the Senate who paired them down to 12, rewriting some before sending them to the states. The States approved 10 of the Amendments which became our Bill of Rights. One of the Amendments that allowed Congress to give themselves a raise remained unpassed until 1992 when it became our 27th Amendment.

So, I totally understand the very important need to keep and bear arms from the perspective of our Founding Fathers if only for the need to once again face off with an oppressive government. Having arms for the purpose of hunting and self-defense would not even have been a debate or conversation in 1787, it would have been a given, as simply common sense. As I've mentioned, I have nearly 70 books in my library devoted on the Constitution. Personally, I think I am in between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists.

[MartinSE]

Clip.....magazine ..........Potato Pa tah to......big deal. I know the technical difference. But clip and magazine are basically interchangeable terms to the average person. Plus clip is quicker to type.
..........People should try and focus in on the main point of a post - not try to point out minor flaws.

You don't post here often do you? The number one strategy of people that can't prove their point (that being Carlson's points) is deflection and ignoring the point of the post to focus on minutiae so they can strut around and quibble. They would have a point if the word in question would (or could) cause confusion. But, it is never the case. Clip Magazine, or maybe Assault weapon, the AF15 is NOT an assault weapon. Even though the term assault weapon mean in general parlance a military looking semi-automatic weapon which can be converted to auto with a bump stock. It is technically wrong. and all refrigerators are not frig's and all adjustable spanners are not crest wrenches, and on and on.

I am sure that makes the parents of the 19 tea children feel much better, they right word will now be used to describe what murdered their children.

[Topspinmo]

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

Sad

You are allowed if, you got money and permit. Or you can buy one on blackmarket like cartels. In this world you can get anything as long as you got enough money and connection.

[Topspinmo]

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


IMO The protection part failed at the school. It’s called complacency.

[Sarah_W]

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.

Finally, can we have a civil conversation on common sense abortion? Before people freak out, nobody is coming for your abortions. We just need to be rational and discuss common sense abortion control. It isn't too much to ask for mandatory background checks with mental health assessment and a nationwide registration list so we know who is having abortions. We need to stop assault abortions occurring after the first trimester and for God's sake, nobody needs high capacity abortions for twins and triplets. One abortion per woman should be plenty because really nobody needs more than one abortion

(*Borrowed from Katie Lamb on TikTok.)

[Topspinmo]

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.

In you’re part of America someone else done all the dirty work so you part don’t have to.

No bears or wolfs cause they been eliminate.

[jimjamuser]

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.
Gee whiz Batwoman! Somehow banana magazine does NOT have the same nice ring to it as BANANA CLIP. And the logic of blaming dems for the recent increase to 400,000 guns in civilian US hands seems a little........shall we say WEAK. There is some other reason for that increase? One religion expert recently tossed out a theory something like.........the religious right-wing uses GUNS as a kind of "virtue signaling". I assume that this lets them find ACCEPTANCE within that religious right. The young man whispers into the fair maiden's ear, "You like GUNS, I like GUNS, let's .........get married and make little right-wing babies"!
.........That is just one theory. I am not sure myself what has caused this recent increase. I need to further ponder that?

[Topspinmo]

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.


What get when start mass prosecution of police officers. Yes, some was warranted but when you tie there hands and then play next day quarter back what it coming to.

[biker1]

Oh, you really mean abortions, not birth control. It takes a lack of moral compass to conflate the two.

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)

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

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.

Spoken like someone who buys the NRA propaganda lock, stock, and double-barrel.

Here's a clue for you (you won't listen to it but here it is anyway):

The NRA has spread the meme about "the only protection against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

The NRA is having their convention this weekend. The NRA convention, supposedly FILLED with nothing but the "best" guys with guns - has banned guns at the convention.

Why is that? Why would they be afraid of the one bad guy with a gun, in a convention filled with thousands of goods guys with guns? Why would they need to forbid ALL firearms there?

The answer: because they don't believe that the only way to protect against a bad guy with a gun is to be a good guy with a gun. They don't believe a word of it. What they believe, is that one bad guy with a gun is a really BAD thing, and since they have no way of knowing which guy is the bad one, they're telling them that none of them can have them. You know, the one thing they're accusing certain political party people of trying to do to them - take away their guns.

At their convention - they're taking away your guns. That's what the NRA is doing, to their own guests at their own convention.

But doing that isn't right for anyone else. It's only right for them.

[Topspinmo]

Gee whiz Batwoman! Somehow banana magazine does NOT have the same nice ring to it as BANANA CLIP. And the logic of blaming dems for the recent increase to 400,000 guns in civilian US hands seems a little........shall we say WEAK. There is some other reason for that increase? One religion expert recently tossed out a theory something like.........the religious right-wing uses GUNS as a kind of "virtue signaling". I assume that this lets them find ACCEPTANCE within that religious right. The young man whispers into the fair maiden's ear, "You like GUNS, I like GUNS, let's .........get married and make little right-wing babies"!
.........That is just one theory. I am not sure myself what has caused this recent increase. I need to further ponder that?


Liberal rant, that’s all.

[jimjamuser]

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.
Interesting theory, but how would that explain the increase from 300 thousand to 400 thousand guns in the last 2 years?

[jimjamuser]

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!
Good educational post. And I ask this question.......do Charter Schools blur the line between church and state? And were they specifically engineered to do just that ?

[MartinSE]

My wife and I had a hour long discussion about the root cause of gun violence in this country today.

This would also explain why so many people believe it is the loss of "faith" that is the problem. The decline of devout Christians happened in the same time period. Which was the cause, can be debated.

This also contains many of the elements I have heard/read on here constantly by my conservative friends. I find myself agreeing with many of their points.

More and more it seems to us that the main thing, the most significant thing that changed was not the growth of the number of guns (that is just a symptom, not a cause) but what changed over the past 50 years is the destruction of the "middle class".

Back in the "good old days" most middle class families had a single bread winner. Not so much today.

Back in the good old days people were optimistic about making a better future for their kids. Not so much today.

Back in the good old days women could CHOOSE to follow a career (or any job) or stay home. Not so much today.

Most people today are pessimistic about the future and they raise their children with that pessimism, frustration and anger. That infects their children with despair, depression, anxiety, apathy and anger. And those children typically don't have a stay at home parent to support them and so they learn from peers, social media and the rage panderers. All of which feed on clicks which are driven by anger and fear.

Back in the good old days kids grew up with positive role models of success (Father knows best, Beaver Cleaver, etc, etc, etc) and positive parents that worked hard but for a reason - to make a better life for their children.

Today, most shows are depressing - post-apocolypse types and shows where the law enforcement officers that used to be like the sheriff of Mayberry, compared to today law enforcement "heroes" often that step outside the system (break the law) to catch the bad guy. Some even are the bad guy (I forget the name but there is a successful show where a serial killer helps the cops catch bad guys, or a show where a school professor turns to making and selling drugs, etc. )

The entire future has shifted from work hard and you can succeed type of optimistic parents to angry and frustrated parents that don't have the time or energy to raise their own kids. So, the kids growing up now go to school fearing they may end up murdered (and they are not always wrong).

Constant stress like that can be crippling and lead to "acting out". They learn to NOT trust the system, because the system is broken and doesn't care about them. No one cares about them, they have been murdered at school for over 20 years now and it appears no one is doing anything to save them. Even their parent(s) abandon them every day to make a living. In the "good old days" parents also worked their ass off and often kids felt abandoned, but then the reason was (in teh background) their parents were working so hard as a way to help their children. Today, their parents are working that hard because of the children - it is expensive to raise children - much more so than in the "good old days". So, the kids have to take on that guilt also - they don't have parents because of them.

Obviously am not saying EVERYONE. I am saying most of the middle class - when there was one.

And that entire change we believe comes about because of the growing death of the middle class. The inevitable result of more and more concentration of wealth in the few. More and more both spouses HAVE to work - not to get ahead, but to survive. And even that is often not enough. We have a growing homeless problem that kids in big cities see everyday. And, they are not just the mental patients, they are not just the lazy "bums" or "hobos" we grew up with. Many are/were upper middle class. I know, I was one of the homeless and it happened suddenly. Just before I had been making 6 figures as an IT consultant. It can and does disappear. When kids see that upper middle class family that went to their school last year - it takes a toll on their belief that they can work hard and succeed. Why brother when everyone they know is working hard and falling behind.

It is a very toxic atmosphere we live in and it leads to very toxic life styles. As old folks from the "good old days" we are very resilient - because most of us grew top in that positive environment. Not all families were my three sons, but the community environment was generally - "this too will pass ,and things will get better". Now it is - things are only going to get worse, nothing I do can change anything. Etc. It is hard to understand what is wrong with this "lazy generation". Why are they not all positive, happy and working to make a better future - we think and say. Which just makes it worse for the children and grand children, because many of us are constantly telling them with these comments that they are lazy failures. Some become broken, and strike out. Guns can then become the tool to express their anger and frustration at the world and everyone in it. Guns give them the power to control their lives. Guns help them be seen. They become important.

I remember a dog trainer telling me, dogs want attention. They will behave to get it, if that doesn't work they will misbehave - but they will get attention, one way or the other. Same can be said for people, especially children.

So, why doesn't this happen in other countries? Well, many of the 1st world countries don't have the disparage in wealth - another thing no so great the US leads in. And combined MOST other countries don't have a plethora of guns easily available. So, when the depressed/angry what ever act out, they have to find other means, because they don't have the easy access to guns.

Anyway, it's just a thought.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Unfortunately that was not clear in the original reply.

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

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.


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.

I don't know what Root Cause Analysis and Six Sigma is. But I do know how to do a google search and check actual case law and state statutes and regulations.

Your information is correct ONLY as it applies to licensed firearms dealers. It doesn't apply to private sales, or gun shows in Texas. Anyone can buy a gun at a gun show, no background check, no license or ID necessary.

[jimjamuser]

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.
As to your 2nd paragraph.......Wealth disparity is NOT a myth or even something in dispute or even close to being political. It IS a STATISTICAL fact that can be looked up for EVERY COUNTRY for COMPARISON purposes. Also another statistic..... the US is 30th or less in UPWARD MOBILITY. Just Google the charts on this!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

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.

And when Johnny brings a ghost gun to school and hides the ammo in his hat or shoes (bypassing the metal detectors), the police will be locked out when he shoots up his science class.

[dewilson58]

Anyway, it's just a thought.

You have over 80 posts in this thread...............are you tired yet??

:ohdear:

[jimjamuser]

True that !

[Sarah_W]

Gee whiz Batwoman! Somehow banana magazine does NOT have the same nice ring to it as BANANA CLIP. And the logic of blaming dems for the recent increase to 400,000 guns in civilian US hands seems a little........shall we say WEAK. There is some other reason for that increase? One religion expert recently tossed out a theory something like.........the religious right-wing uses GUNS as a kind of "virtue signaling". I assume that this lets them find ACCEPTANCE within that religious right. The young man whispers into the fair maiden's ear, "You like GUNS, I like GUNS, let's .........get married and make little right-wing babies"!
.........That is just one theory. I am not sure myself what has caused this recent increase. I need to further ponder that?

Yeah, banana mag sounds odd, doesn't it? I can't ignore the significant uptick in firearms sales since January of 2020 and the rabid hoarding of ammunition. The shear number of first time gun buyers is/was hugely significant. That tells me people were and still are afraid and feel vulnerable. A high percentage of my students relate these feelings to me. When the pandemic began I lived 40 miles north of Los Angeles. Hoarding of common household items became a serious problem. People were actually hurting other people in stores. Crime rose dramatically with home invasions. By mid 2020 what the future held was anyones guess. I lived with my cousin and we made risk assessments of our home. We made contingency plans. Obviously, I feel quite capable of defending my home, but what about beyond? CA's Governor shut down gun shops for a while and all of the sudden we knew exactly what its like to not be able to buy ammo. Being in "the business" I had professional contacts and I made sure not to fall below 1,000 rounds in any caliber. I have to have ammo to teach and of course for my own needs.

It disturbs me when evil people, criminals conduct their heinous crimes, killing innocents, especially children. To the core. Then our Legislators want to tell me that I can't have this gun or that gun. Not because of my conduct or my behavior but because of the conduct of an evil person.

i can't accept their reasoning.

[MartinSE]

I think it's important to look at our history prior to 1787 and what led up to the writing of the Constitution. Arguably the path was set with the Stamp Act of 1765, converging in Concord and Lexington in 1775 as the British moved to disarm Americans. Our Revolutionary War lasted 8 years and they were very hard desperate years. As Patrick Henry famously said, "I know not what path others may take, but for me, give me Liberty or give me Death.". That sentence sums up our quest for Independence and self-determination. John Dickinson's name has been lost to history for most Americans, but his importance for his time can't be understated. He wrote the grievances to King George, which are delineated in our Declaration of Independence, as well as the Articles of Confederation. But, after eight years of governing this new nation under the Articles it was clear it didn't work and needed to be fixed.

In 1787, 12 of the 13 states sent delegates to Philadelphia with one directive, fix the Articles. It was clear they were not authorized to do anything else. The debates ensued and it didn't take long for them to recognize that the Articles were not salvageable. The debates continued and they drafted the Constitution. Individual citizens Rights were not included.

I think the heart of the matter, when it comes to the Bill of Rights, comes to Federalism versus Anti-Federalism. I can really appreciate that they were able to work together to create our Freedom documents. I think we can all understand that surviving eight years of war with the most powerful government and most powerful military of their time might leave them resistant to create another government that might oppress them some day (Anti-Federalists). We can also understand the need of having a strong government and global presence (Federalists). The leading Federalists, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, John Adams and more did not want a Bill of Rights. Anti-Federalists, Patrick Henry, Daniel Webster, Thomas Jefferson, did not want a strong central government and fought for a Bill of Rights to be included.

It is not difficult to get into the hearts and minds of our Founding Fathers. So much of it is documented. James Madison knew they were doing historic work and transcribed all of their debates. They can be read in a bound book that is 600 type written pages. There are other books on the debates. We have the writings of John Dickinson, Joseph Story, Daniel Webster and so many more. Between 1776 and 1826, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson wrote 1,250 letters to each other. Today that is three volumes.

Knowing that their government sought to disarm them; knowing that they fought eight long years against their government for Independence from oppressive government agendas; and knowing that absolute power corrupts absolutely, I understand the need to enshrine certain Rights with the goal of never having the same oppression. It was required that all 13 states ratify the new Constitution and it took 10 of 13 to pass the Amendments. The Framers heard the message loud and clear that it would not get ratified if the Individual Rights were not included. Madison presented 19 Amendment to the House, to appease the Anti-Federalists. The House presented 17 Amendments to the Senate who paired them down to 12, rewriting some before sending them to the states. The States approved 10 of the Amendments which became our Bill of Rights. One of the Amendments that allowed Congress to give themselves a raise remained unpassed until 1992 when it became our 27th Amendment.

So, I totally understand the very important need to keep and bear arms from the perspective of our Founding Fathers if only for the need to once again face off with an oppressive government. Having arms for the purpose of hunting and self-defense would not even have been a debate or conversation in 1787, it would have been a given, as simply common sense. As I've mentioned, I have nearly 70 books in my library devoted on the Constitution. Personally, I think I am in between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists.

Thank you for that excellent summary. I agree with you, and every thing you said. I do think, from my own readings that there was a lot of "closed door" compromises with slavery, rights, and more - and they all knew it would require compromises on both sides. I also believe they included the ability to modify the constitution specify so changes could be made after the bare minimum they could get passed was actually passed.
---

I have NO desire to do away with gun ownership, as a practical matter and as a "it doesn't really matter" matter. Responsible good people use guns responsibly. Duh. It is the minority of bad actors that causes everyone else to suffer.

I call it my "speed bump theory" of social engineering.

That goes like this, shopping centers have to slow down the few reckless speeders that are endangering the stores customers and driving their insurance through the roof. The responsible people are driving carefully, and not causing any problems. But that small minority races through the parking lot. So, enter speed bumps. It slows down the responsible customers, it even causes damage to the but - but it works enough (not perfect but good enough) to make the insurance company happy, and so we all are punished because of the actions of the few. Eventually, most people drive slowly (social engineered) enough to be "safe" in the parking lots - with or with out the speed bumps.

Sounds to me kind of like the situation we are in with guns. The problem is, how do we solve the problem without punishing the responsible people...

Again, thank you, you seem to be a voice of reason and knowledge in a field of anger and chaos. I look forward to learning more from you.

[dewilson58]

You have over 80 posts in this thread...............are you tired yet??

:ohdear:

Guess not.

:ohdear::ohdear:

[jimjamuser]

From what I can see, most present day 'Texans' were on the other side at the Alamo!
That is just a "teeny, tiny" bit racist. So, I will not comment.

[jimjamuser]

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.
Yes, greed became good..........practically a religion.

[jimjamuser]

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

Sad
That is the root of this discussion!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

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?

It's not semantics. It's the point of the discussion. You argue about the unconstitutionality of restricting the right to bear arms.

"Arms" have an actual meaning. A definition. It means weapons. It doesn't mean guns. It means weapons. It is a generic term that is NOT more specifically defined in the Constitution.

So MartinSE's point is 100% valid. You say we all have the right to bear arms. Arms means weapons. It does not mean guns, exclusively. It is also not a matter of semantics. It is a matter of law.

[jimjamuser]

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
yes, that IS what I have been saying to prove my opinion!

[Taltarzac725]

Would the Founding Fathers want the "well-regulated militia" to have cannons? Probably if they were to be able to meet a similarly armed foe. How about private citizens having cannon? Maybe if they were captains of legal pirate ships Privateers (https://www.history.navy.mil/our-collections/art/exhibits/conflicts-and-operations/the-war-of-1812/privateers.html#:~:text=Tags-,Privateers,letter%20of%20marque%2C%20during%20war time) who faced other ships with cannon but just some person in some city or town? I kind of doubt they were let just anyone own a cannon.

[Kenswing]

You have over 80 posts in this thread...............are you tired yet??

:ohdear:

I think Grumpy and JimmyJam are in competition for who can say the same thing over and over the most times. Grumpy took a quick lead but JimmyJam is coming on strong.

[Sarah_W]

My wife and I had a hour long discussion about the root cause of gun violence in this country today.


Anyway, it's just a thought.

Excellent post!

[Sarah_W]

And when Johnny brings a ghost gun to school and hides the ammo in his hat or shoes (bypassing the metal detectors), the police will be locked out when he shoots up his science class.

Neither a "ghost gun" nor ammo would bypass a metal detector.

[MartinSE]

Yeah, banana mag sounds odd, doesn't it? I can't ignore the significant uptick in firearms sales since January of 2020 and the rabid hoarding of ammunition. The shear number of first time gun buyers is/was hugely significant. That tells me people were and still are afraid and feel vulnerable. A high percentage of my students relate these feelings to me. When the pandemic began I lived 40 miles north of Los Angeles. Hoarding of common household items became a serious problem. People were actually hurting other people in stores. Crime rose dramatically with home invasions. By mid 2020 what the future held was anyones guess. I lived with my cousin and we made risk assessments of our home. We made contingency plans. Obviously, I feel quite capable of defending my home, but what about beyond? CA's Governor shut down gun shops for a while and all of the sudden we knew exactly what its like to not be able to buy ammo. Being in "the business" I had professional contacts and I made sure not to fall below 1,000 rounds in any caliber. I have to have ammo to teach and of course for my own needs.

It disturbs me when evil people, criminals conduct their heinous crimes, killing innocents, especially children. To the core. Then our Legislators want to tell me that I can't have this gun or that gun. Not because of my conduct or my behavior but because of the conduct of an evil person.

i can't accept their reasoning.

Another reasonable post, this is getting to be a habit with you.

I guess I have been "out of touch" (personally inflicted) for a while and I just learned tonight that the Administration is going to make another attempt at banning "assault weapons". Obviously in response to the emergent situation. I am a liberal and I am TOTALLY against that. I am about as anti-gun as a person can be, and I am totally against that. Why, you ask?

Because it is typical liberal/DEM grand standing and it is stupid. It is grandstanding because it is stupid and they know it and they will try anyway. It is stupid because it probably wont pass - so they burn political capital to achieve nothing. It is stupid because even if they get it passed, it will be cut down by the SCOTIS. It is stupid because even if they get it passed, and the SCOTUS does not knock it down, it wont work, because there is no way to collect all the AR15s from people that don't want to give them up. The main thing the law will accomplish is there will be a sudden rash of "stolen gun" reports, and a bunch of AR15's will suddenly mysteriously disappear. Yeah right...

Sigh.

It can't work. It is obvious to the most casual observer. For reasons often expressed here - frequently wrongly (bats anyone), but at the heart is the simple argument that even if somehow the government sends out millions of agents to forcibly collect the guns (a REALLY bad idea) the guns will magically disappear. But, even if the agents find them and one day there are NO AR15's around - okay, so what? There are plenty of alternatives. As many have said hand guns are also semi automatic, hand guns are smaller, lighter, easier to hide, and a 9mm, I believe, can hold 17 rounds. So, a more powerful close in gun that can kill 17 instead of 19 children. And I am SURE you can come up with even better alternatives. So, all the law will actually do at BEST is change the gun of preference for DEMS to hate on.

I really wish the administration would consider passing legislation to close loop hopes in existing laws, pass a universal back ground check and pass a domestic violence bill.

Domestic violence correlates to mass shootings - not saying causation, but there is a strong correlation. And hand guns are the most frequent gun of choice in mass shootings - not AR15's. So they would be addressing two issues - domestic violence and hand guns used in mass shootings, that could probably get passes, it doesn't require the banning of any guns, and it might have an impact - small but measurable impact on mass shootings.

For the schools the ONLY thing I see for now is hardening. No guns carried by teachers - bad idea. No patrolling guard and guard towers. No rate fencing around the school.

But, hardening that is already being used in many schools. Things like locked doors at class rooms. ID verification at a single entry point, maybe with an armed guard - sort of a TSA at airports approach. Surveillance cameras inside and out.

And, here is a tech idea - automatic gun shot detection and location determination in and around schools, that automatically notifies a trained experienced team of responders - sort of a swat team that specializes in mass shooting and school shootings - nothing else. Every city/town would have two teams one primary and one backup. (hopefully we will not get to having two mass shootings per day even in a big city - but maybe)

It is even possible using some of the new AI technologies to identify what type of round/gun was fired (or a good guess) and how many guns are active.

I HATE any of those ideas being put in around elementary schools. I think it is normalizing horror to children. But, for gods sake it has been over 20 years and we have made NO progress. Lots of stupid stuff, but nothing that stopped the recent shooters and constant growth in mass and school shootings.

So, let us do something that can help. Maybe not perfect but better than banning a gun that another gun can be substituted in hours with another model. All politics and no cattle - to paraphrase a Texas saying.

[Sarah_W]

Thank you for that excellent summary. I agree with you, and every thing you said. I do think, from my own readings that there was a lot of "closed door" compromises with slavery, rights, and more - and they all knew it would require compromises on both sides. I also believe they included the ability to modify the constitution specify so changes could be made after the bare minimum they could get passed was actually passed.
---

I have NO desire to do away with gun ownership, as a practical matter and as a "it doesn't really matter" matter. Responsible good people use guns responsibly. Duh. It is the minority of bad actors that causes everyone else to suffer.

I call it my "speed bump theory" of social engineering.

That goes like this, shopping centers have to slow down the few reckless speeders that are endangering the stores customers and driving their insurance through the roof. The responsible people are driving carefully, and not causing any problems. But that small minority races through the parking lot. So, enter speed bumps. It slows down the responsible customers, it even causes damage to the but - but it works enough (not perfect but good enough) to make the insurance company happy, and so we all are punished because of the actions of the few. Eventually, most people drive slowly (social engineered) enough to be "safe" in the parking lots - with or with out the speed bumps.

Sounds to me kind of like the situation we are in with guns. The problem is, how do we solve the problem without punishing the responsible people...

Again, thank you, you seem to be a voice of reason and knowledge in a field of anger and chaos. I look forward to learning more from you.

As I recall, slavery was a very serious topic during the drafting of the Constitution. After all, "All men are created equal". South Carolina was an economic powerhouse at that time and therefore had a tremendous influence of the proceedings. Slavery of course was the engine of their economy.

The reason I don't like the analogy of cars=guns is because driving a car is a privilege, not a Right. A Right has much more importance than a privilege.

[MartinSE]

You have over 80 posts in this thread...............are you tired yet??

:ohdear:

Yes I am tired, I am "sick and tired" of empty thoughts and prayers. I am sick and tired or pointless arguing on what to call a magazine and not coming up with any ideas on how to stop being known as the best country to move to if you want your children to be murdered while being taught to read.

And I am sick and tired of people that would rather argue than try - just try - to fix the problem.

And rest assure, if WE THE PEOPLE want to, we can accomplish anything, solving this problem is easier than going to the moon and we did that.

But instead we go 20 years and accomplish nothing.

Yes, I am very tired. Aren't you?

If my 80 posts bother you, I strongly urge you to block me. It really isn't all that hard.

[MartinSE]

The reason I don't like the analogy of cars=guns is because driving a car is a privilege, not a Right. A Right has much more importance than a privilege.

Very true, but most people have cars and hate speed bumps, while only half the people own guns. Most of those people, I expect, never encounter a situation where they are intimately involved with a gun. So, I use the analogy because most people on both sides of the aisle can relate to it.

But also, rights are VERY important, but as a renowned conservative SCOTUS once said, (to paraphrase) "All right are given by the government and can be restricted or limited by the government, including gun rights. Hence, we have gun control laws. The gun control laws we have may be stupid or not effective, but there are limits - even to the first amendment. As I have said in several posts - I want my M1Abrams and I want it now damn it. My RIGHT to bear arms shall not be infringed on and my arms of choice is a tank.

Uh, probably won't happen. But, I can yell - LOL! point being all rights are limited to some degree.

EDIT: Oh I forgot, I expect you have heard of sovereign citizens? They believe that driving is a RIGHT. and they don't need the government to give them permission or a license. So far they have had some difficulty in finding a judge that agrees with them - lol!

[MartinSE]

Good night everyone, enough is as good as a feast, and this thread has been way more than enough for me - wasted another day of the limited supply I have left trying to discuss a serious topic with people that aren't interested. Well a few are interested - most not so much. So, bonne nuit.

I might take a day or two off to recover some balance (I know, I can already hear the crowd roaring with cheers!). I hope I didn't repeat myself too much in this closing post.

[Davonu]

…solving this problem is easier than going to the moon and we did that….
Couldn’t disagree more.

The moon was a technical challenge, with absolute, computable solutions. Dealing with human mental illness and evil to stop heinous acts of mass murder is far more complex.

[Sarah_W]

Another reasonable post, this is getting to be a habit with you.

I guess I have been "out of touch" (personally inflicted) for a while and I just learned tonight that the Administration is going to make another attempt at banning "assault weapons". Obviously in response to the emergent situation. I am a liberal and I am TOTALLY against that. I am about as anti-gun as a person can be, and I am totally against that. Why, you ask?

Because it is typical liberal/DEM grand standing and it is stupid. It is grandstanding because it is stupid and they know it and they will try anyway. It is stupid because it probably wont pass - so they burn political capital to achieve nothing. It is stupid because even if they get it passed, it will be cut down by the SCOTIS. It is stupid because even if they get it passed, and the SCOTUS does not knock it down, it wont work, because there is no way to collect all the AR15s from people that don't want to give them up. The main thing the law will accomplish is there will be a sudden rash of "stolen gun" reports, and a bunch of AR15's will suddenly mysteriously disappear. Yeah right...

Sigh.

It can't work. It is obvious to the most casual observer. For reasons often expressed here - frequently wrongly (bats anyone), but at the heart is the simple argument that even if somehow the government sends out millions of agents to forcibly collect the guns (a REALLY bad idea) the guns will magically disappear. But, even if the agents find them and one day there are NO AR15's around - okay, so what? There are plenty of alternatives. As many have said hand guns are also semi automatic, hand guns are smaller, lighter, easier to hide, and a 9mm, I believe, can hold 17 rounds. So, a more powerful close in gun that can kill 17 instead of 19 children. And I am SURE you can come up with even better alternatives. So, all the law will actually do at BEST is change the gun of preference for DEMS to hate on.

I really wish the administration would consider passing legislation to close loop hopes in existing laws, pass a universal back ground check and pass a domestic violence bill.

Domestic violence correlates to mass shootings - not saying causation, but there is a strong correlation. And hand guns are the most frequent gun of choice in mass shootings - not AR15's. So they would be addressing two issues - domestic violence and hand guns used in mass shootings, that could probably get passes, it doesn't require the banning of any guns, and it might have an impact - small but measurable impact on mass shootings.

For the schools the ONLY thing I see for now is hardening. No guns carried by teachers - bad idea. No patrolling guard and guard towers. No rate fencing around the school.

But, hardening that is already being used in many schools. Things like locked doors at class rooms. ID verification at a single entry point, maybe with an armed guard - sort of a TSA at airports approach. Surveillance cameras inside and out.

And, here is a tech idea - automatic gun shot detection and location determination in and around schools, that automatically notifies a trained experienced team of responders - sort of a swat team that specializes in mass shooting and school shootings - nothing else. Every city/town would have two teams one primary and one backup. (hopefully we will not get to having two mass shootings per day even in a big city - but maybe)

It is even possible using some of the new AI technologies to identify what type of round/gun was fired (or a good guess) and how many guns are active.

I HATE any of those ideas being put in around elementary schools. I think it is normalizing horror to children. But, for gods sake it has been over 20 years and we have made NO progress. Lots of stupid stuff, but nothing that stopped the recent shooters and constant growth in mass and school shootings.

So, let us do something that can help. Maybe not perfect but better than banning a gun that another gun can be substituted in hours with another model. All politics and no cattle - to paraphrase a Texas saying.

I agree. We shall see whether they successfully ban AR's. It is a fools errand given how many are in circulation. You are also correct in that there are many replacements if someone is determined to mass carnage. I find it hard to believe our Legislators are that naive. To turn an old phrase, "You can eat an elephant one bite at a time". That is the approach to defeating the 2nd Amendment, and their agenda, in my opinion. If they did succeed in another ban I'm not convinced the SCOTUS would hear such a case.

I would like to see a Congressional Investigation to seriously study all mass shootings with an extra emphasis on school shootings. It would need to be an in depth analysis.

In the meantime, interim solutions should be put in place for all schools to prevent entry of a shooter. We have single point entries to get on airplanes with scanning machines. If all doors to enter a building are locked but a controlled entrance you can stop the easy access. I don't know how long such an attack actually lasts but I have to believe the response needs to be within minutes. The principal could have a gun safe and there could be volunteer staff who are professional trained to respond to a shooter before the Police arrive. They could wear a certain color vest so not to be confused with the active shooter.


In 2018, I lived about 2 miles from the Borderline Bar & Grill when Ian David Long killed 12 people and injured 16. He had a .45 cal. Glock handgun and 7 high capacity magazines. No AR.

I used to go to the Borderline years ago to dance. In 2018 it was a popular hangout for college kids. Long was raised without a father figure and was a trouble maker in school, sometime threatening teachers, etc. After high school he went into the Marine Corp and received excellent training. The turning point for him was breaking up with his girlfriend, which pushed him over the edge. He went to a bar where he was known and killed people.

The first person he killed was the unarmed security guard. Then he entered the door and shot the young woman who collects the cover charge in the face. As dancers panicked with no where to run he opened fire. Some broke windows to get out, some tried to hide. There were 3 off duty cops there that night enjoying the music. But, according to CA law/regulation they are not allowed to be armed when they are in a bar. Even though they were unarmed, they shielded young people with their bodies.

Now I will tell you some things you won't find in news articles. The first to respond were two CHP officers, one a woman. They arrived and could hear the shooting inside the bar but the cowards wouldn't go inside. A few minutes later Sheriff Deputy Ron Helus arrived. He tried to organize the three of them to engage. As they went in the female officer who was terrified accidentally shot Ron in the back. He was months from retirement.

Ventura County is not far from Las Vegas and it has a great Country station and Country fans. At least 800 people from Ventura attended the Route 91 concert in Las Vegas for that massacre. Some died. The Borderline was a meeting place for Route 91 survivors. For some of the people at the Borderline that night it was the second time they had been the victim of a mass shooting event. One or two of the young people who survived Las Vegas died at the Borderline.

The following spring I had four students who were there that night who took several lessons with me. They don't ever want to feel that helpless again.

What I know is that these events go down quickly and the Police will be along to clean up the mess. The First Defender is us, the only ones at the scene when it begins. When I've been asked why I train as much as I do my answer is simply this. Statistically, it is not likely that I will ever face an armed assailant. But, the chances are not zero.

[Trayderjoe]

I don't know what Root Cause Analysis and Six Sigma is. But I do know how to do a google search and check actual case law and state statutes and regulations.

Your information is correct ONLY as it applies to licensed firearms dealers. It doesn't apply to private sales, or gun shows in Texas. Anyone can buy a gun at a gun show, no background check, no license or ID necessary.

Yeah, not quite. Many licensed gun dealers (FFLs) attend gun shows. Federal law requires that an FFL conduct a background check whenever they sell a firearm, whether at their own store or at a booth at a gun show. The ONLY time an FFL is not required under federal law to conduct a background check is if the purchaser has a valid firearm license from the state that is not less than 5 years old per 18 U.S. Code § 922(t). I can't speak to Texas, but my experience in Florida is that license or not, a background check is conducted when purchasing a firearm from an FFL.

It is correct that a private sale does not require a background check and there are some private sales that do occur at gun shows. However, these types of sales are typically "one offs" and not someone at a table selling a hundred guns. Telling you that responsible gun owners making a private sale won't just sell a gun to anyone will fall on deaf ears, but at least I tried.

[Trayderjoe]

Spoken like someone who buys the NRA propaganda lock, stock, and double-barrel.

Here's a clue for you (you won't listen to it but here it is anyway):

The NRA has spread the meme about "the only protection against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

The NRA is having their convention this weekend. The NRA convention, supposedly FILLED with nothing but the "best" guys with guns - has banned guns at the convention.

Why is that? Why would they be afraid of the one bad guy with a gun, in a convention filled with thousands of goods guys with guns? Why would they need to forbid ALL firearms there?

The answer: because they don't believe that the only way to protect against a bad guy with a gun is to be a good guy with a gun. They don't believe a word of it. What they believe, is that one bad guy with a gun is a really BAD thing, and since they have no way of knowing which guy is the bad one, they're telling them that none of them can have them. You know, the one thing they're accusing certain political party people of trying to do to them - take away their guns.

At their convention - they're taking away your guns. That's what the NRA is doing, to their own guests at their own convention.

But doing that isn't right for anyone else. It's only right for them.

Yeah.....no. There were a couple of prior posts in this thread that explained why the gun ban was put in place for the upcoming convention when others made similar incorrect statements.

[ElLegal]

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

🤔🤔🤔🥤🍿

[ElLegal]

:popcorn::popcorn:

🥃-🥃

[ElLegal]

Successful lawsuits against gun manufacturers might get some changes like those the tobacco companies underwent decades ago.

What have gun manufacturers done wrong? When we have the shootings, most of the time the perpetrator has been on the radar, and known to authorities.

[ElLegal]

I think we do have too many guns in America. I own guns but can be realistic about it.

The thing is, it is not the entirety of the issue.

Google acid attacks in London. Knife attacks in the UK.

If you want to hear about mass casualty, Google Bow and Arrow killer in Norway.

I would agree that guns do enable mentally ill people to commit mass casualty events more broadly and severely.

So how many guns do you think the government should “allow” citizens to own?

Problem is mental illness.

But again if people couldn’t get their hands on guns, And they were hellbent on harming others, not having a gun wouldn’t get in their way.
🥃🥃

[Woodbear]

It is painful to read how uneducated some are when it comes to guns. A new AR platform ban is a joke. Below is 2 pictures of the SAME firearm. One has a wood stock and the other is scary black. They both shoot the same round. They both can change their magazine capacity. They are equally effective at doing their job. So what is an AR.......a normal gun in a costume!

[jdulej]

The shooter legally purchased two AR platform rifles from a federally licensed gun store. This WOULD have required a background check.

Does anyone know if a background check (Fed or state, if there is one) reaches back to a person's history when they were a minor? The check on the current mass killer would be pretty pointless if it only covered the 2 days when he was 18+.

[MDLNB]

Spoken like someone who buys the NRA propaganda lock, stock, and double-barrel.

Here's a clue for you (you won't listen to it but here it is anyway):

The NRA has spread the meme about "the only protection against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

The NRA is having their convention this weekend. The NRA convention, supposedly FILLED with nothing but the "best" guys with guns - has banned guns at the convention.

Why is that? Why would they be afraid of the one bad guy with a gun, in a convention filled with thousands of goods guys with guns? Why would they need to forbid ALL firearms there?

The answer: because they don't believe that the only way to protect against a bad guy with a gun is to be a good guy with a gun. They don't believe a word of it. What they believe, is that one bad guy with a gun is a really BAD thing, and since they have no way of knowing which guy is the bad one, they're telling them that none of them can have them. You know, the one thing they're accusing certain political party people of trying to do to them - take away their guns.

At their convention - they're taking away your guns. That's what the NRA is doing, to their own guests at their own convention.

But doing that isn't right for anyone else. It's only right for them.


It's already been explained that the reason for banning guns at the "NRA convention" was because Trump was speaking there. Don't you think that the SS has enough difficulty protecting high profile subjects?

[Keefelane66]

It’s good to know there is only ONE Casket maker of children’s Caskets 4 sizes in 12 colors. Cherokee Casket Company/ Georgia they are donating them to the Texas Families

[MDLNB]

It is painful to read how uneducated some are when it comes to guns. A new AR platform ban is a joke. Below is 2 pictures of the SAME firearm. One has a wood stock and the other is scary black. They both shoot the same round. They both can change their magazine capacity. They are equally effective at doing their job. So what is an AR.......a normal gun in a costume!


Excellent point, but it will go way over the heads of most of the posters on here. You will hear such as "patato-potato" "clip or magazine" "too much trouble spelling it out" etc. They will criticize others and then chastise them on being corrected themselves. You can't win with the ignorant on a subject, when they are not prepared to discuss the subject civilly. Even some of us agree with each other and argue "semantics." Instead of addressing the reason/cause of the assault or how to prevent one gun owner in 150 million from going on a rampage, they would rather punish ALL gun owners with their ignorance. To stop a gun fight, get rid of the guns. To stop a DUI, get rid of the booze or automobile. To stop bad language, outlaw the terms.



The example you provided is of (I believe) a Ruger 10/22 rifle that is one of the most popular 22 cal rifles on the market. For around a hundred bucks or so, one can convert it to the one shown after your first example. The second one is commonly mistaken by the ignorant as an assault weapon because it has black plastic on it and it looks threatening(?). You can purchase a 50 round "magazine" that will fit either one and exchangeable. Both will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

From what I have read, the shooter at the school did NOT have an AR-15, but an AR-15 look alike. I can't confirm that, but it is possible. The type of gun does not make a difference because all guns are dangerous. Some on here insist that they do not wish to ban "all guns" just the "assault weapons" like the ones used in the mass shooting. They don't even know what they are talking about, yet they insist that "assault weapons" are dangerous.

The perpetrator left plenty of warning of what he was going to do. He was ignored. I got that from what I read in the news, so I can't confirm the source. However, he was known to have a "temper" and to "mutilate himself." He used social media and threatened to "shoot up a school." He was said to have been "bullied and to be a bully." Could these details be warning signs?

[MartinSE]

It's already been explained that the reason for banning guns at the "NRA convention" was because Trump was speaking there. Don't you think that the SS has enough difficulty protecting high profile subjects?

Please3 explain this rationale.

Guns make us safe. More gun make us safer, Gun free zones are worthless because makes it easier to kill us.

Trump will be there, so it is too hard to keep him safe unless we ban guns. What could be safer for Trump than a room full of ardent supporters packing?

The hypocrisy is blatant. Everyday in every way we are told we need more guns to make us safer, but Trump needs more guns to keep him safer from his own supporters?

[MDLNB]

Yeah, banana mag sounds odd, doesn't it? I can't ignore the significant uptick in firearms sales since January of 2020 and the rabid hoarding of ammunition. The shear number of first time gun buyers is/was hugely significant. That tells me people were and still are afraid and feel vulnerable. A high percentage of my students relate these feelings to me. When the pandemic began I lived 40 miles north of Los Angeles. Hoarding of common household items became a serious problem. People were actually hurting other people in stores. Crime rose dramatically with home invasions. By mid 2020 what the future held was anyones guess. I lived with my cousin and we made risk assessments of our home. We made contingency plans. Obviously, I feel quite capable of defending my home, but what about beyond? CA's Governor shut down gun shops for a while and all of the sudden we knew exactly what its like to not be able to buy ammo. Being in "the business" I had professional contacts and I made sure not to fall below 1,000 rounds in any caliber. I have to have ammo to teach and of course for my own needs.

It disturbs me when evil people, criminals conduct their heinous crimes, killing innocents, especially children. To the core. Then our Legislators want to tell me that I can't have this gun or that gun. Not because of my conduct or my behavior but because of the conduct of an evil person.

i can't accept their reasoning.


Excellent post! And one that many (millions) gun owners empathize with.

[MartinSE]

So how many guns do you think the government should “allow” citizens to own?

Problem is mental illness.

But again if people couldn’t get their hands on guns, And they were hellbent on harming others, not having a gun wouldn’t get in their way.
🥃🥃

What type of guns should the government ALLOW to have? I want an M1 Tank. It's just a car with a built in gun. If I can't have that, why can't I have a fully automatic weapon, like an old school m50?

Please, tell me so I can understand why I can have what I want when the constitution says my right to be armed shall not be restricted. It sure seems like it is being restricted.

Sorry, I have been told to stop repeating myself. All I do is respond to the same posts by different people. It's almost like so many watch the same shows - them come here and repeat what they have been told - almost word for word. You know when a detective is investigating a case, and she hears exactly the same story for multiple people - it raises a flag.

[jdulej]

It's already been explained that the reason for banning guns at the "NRA convention" was because Trump was speaking there. Don't you think that the SS has enough difficulty protecting high profile subjects?

You're sort of making the original poster's point. A room full of people with guns means you've got something to worry about. A room full of people without guns, means you have a lot less to worry about. The NRA tries to spin it the other way round.

For me, I'd much rather be in a store or school or a church (not that you could drag me into one of those) full of people without guns.

[PugMom]

Excellent point, but it will go way over the heads of most of the posters on here. You will hear such as "patato-potato" "clip or magazine" "too much trouble spelling it out" etc. They will criticize others and then chastise them on being corrected themselves. You can't win with the ignorant on a subject, when they are not prepared to discuss the subject civilly. Even some of us agree with each other and argue "semantics." Instead of addressing the reason/cause of the assault or how to prevent one gun owner in 150 million from going on a rampage, they would rather punish ALL gun owners with their ignorance. To stop a gun fight, get rid of the guns. To stop a DUI, get rid of the booze or automobile. To stop bad language, outlaw the terms.



The example you provided is of (I believe) a Ruger 10/22 rifle that is one of the most popular 22 cal rifles on the market. For around a hundred bucks or so, one can convert it to the one shown after your first example. The second one is commonly mistaken by the ignorant as an assault weapon because it has black plastic on it and it looks threatening(?). You can purchase a 50 round "magazine" that will fit either one and exchangeable. Both will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

From what I have read, the shooter at the school did NOT have an AR-15, but an AR-15 look alike. I can't confirm that, but it is possible. The type of gun does not make a difference because all guns are dangerous. Some on here insist that they do not wish to ban "all guns" just the "assault weapons" like the ones used in the mass shooting. They don't even know what they are talking about, yet they insist that "assault weapons" are dangerous.

The perpetrator left plenty of warning of what he was going to do. He was ignored. I got that from what I read in the news, so I can't confirm the source. However, he was known to have a "temper" and to "mutilate himself." He used social media and threatened to "shoot up a school." He was said to have been "bullied and to be a bully." Could these details be warning signs?

excellent post, because everyone knows that evil gun jumped off the rack on it's own & single handedly took down innocent kids. never mind the wacko carrying the gun, or the various posts he made of himself with the weapons, with a tag line ;kids be afraid 2day, or the red flags that showed up in his social media posts. nope, it was all the gun's fault

[MDLNB]

What type of guns should the government ALLOW to have? I want an M1 Tank. It's just a car with a built in gun. If I can't have that, why can't I have a fully automatic weapon, like an old school m50?

Please, tell me so I can understand why I can have what I want when the constitution says my right to be armed shall not be restricted. It sure seems like it is being restricted.

Sorry, I have been told to stop repeating myself. All I do is respond to the same posts by different people. It's almost like so many watch the same shows - them come here and repeat what they have been told - almost word for word. You know when a detective is investigating a case, and she hears exactly the same story for multiple people - it raises a flag.


I'm sorry that no one has answered your question to your satisfaction. Please allow me to answer the question that you probably already know the answer to. You CAN own a M1 tank and/or a fully automatic weapon. Google is your friend. If you apply for a federal permit and undergo a background check and pay a substantial fee, you can own the tank and/or the fully automatic weapon. And you can even call it an "assault weapon" if it pleases you. There you, you're welcome. :icon_wink::)

[PugMom]

You're sort of making the original poster's point. A room full of people with guns means you've got something to worry about. A room full of people without guns, means you have a lot less to worry about. The NRA tries to spin it the other way round.

For me, I'd much rather be in a store or school or a church (not that you could drag me into one of those) full of people without guns.

it's the exact opposite where we are. half the neighborhood is ex military or ex police. i'd say a GOOD number are armed properly. good guys with guns always makes me feel safer

[MartinSE]

Couldn’t disagree more.

The moon was a technical challenge, with absolute, computable solutions. Dealing with human mental illness and evil to stop heinous acts of mass murder is far more complex.

See it is hard to solve something when you are looking in the wrong places. Mental health is a red herring being pushed by the parties with a vested interest. I can post links to dozens of studies by top psychologists in the world (but I wont because I have been given a vacation for posting too many links - spamming they called it). And they all come to the same conclusion - summarized by this:

Are All Mass Shooters Mentally Ill? (https://www.michiganpsychologicalassociation.org/index.php?option=com_dailyplanetblog&view=entry&year=2021&month=02&day=28&id=72:are-all-mass-shooters-mentally-ill-)

Here is the link, but I know most wont bother to read it, since it might disturb peoples world view. If you are interested in truth and not propaganda as so many claim - the take a look.

"They discovered that only 11% of all mass murderers (including shooters) and only 8% of mass shooters had a serious mental illness. They also found that mass shooters in the United States were more likely to have legal histories, use recreational drugs, abuse alcohol, and have histories of non-psychotic psychiatric or neurologic symptoms."

Let me repeat that, 8% of mass shooters have mental health problems associated with the shooting.

According to John Hopkins Medicine , 26% of Americans 18 and older have some form of diagnosable mental health.

Repeat that - 8% of shooters are mentally ill, 26% of the general population are mentally ill. Hmm.

So, there is an interesting anomaly here - MORE people that are NOT mass murders have some form of mental illness than the mass shooter. The shooters would seem to be "healthier". (that would be a false comparison, for those paying attention - since there are very few shooters so the sample size is very small.)

Mental Health Disorder Statistics | Johns Hopkins Medicine (https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/mental-health-disorder-statistics)

According to other sources, 20% of the worlds population has mental health issues.

So, PLEASE, since you claim mental health explains mass shootings and school murders, PLEASE explain why the US is the ONLY country experiencing regular school shooting. Great Britain hasn't had one since 1996 with they banned most guns. Coincidence?

PLEASE explain WHY there are not MORE shootings since the general population has 3 times as much mental illness as the shooter population?

There, Did I repeat it enough times?

I won't wait for an answer, since EVERY single person I have asked, failed to respond with an answer. Typically if they answer at all they just deflect with "things are different here - yeah they are different. We have 400 million guns on circulation. And in this particular case virtually no requirements to buy a gun except a government ID, be 18, and breathing. (Oh and a pocket full of money)

[Bay Kid]

Does anyone know if a background check (Fed or state, if there is one) reaches back to a person's history when they were a minor? The check on the current mass killer would be pretty pointless if it only covered the 2 days when he was 18+.

Just because he was a minor 2 days before he bought guns they don't look at his past history. Lots and lots of minors are already criminals. Just because they turn 18 doesn't make them new saints. Don't blame the gun, blame the law that doesn't look at the history of this crazy punk kid.

[jdulej]

it's the exact opposite where we are. half the neighborhood is ex military or ex police. i'd say a GOOD number are armed properly. good guys with guns always makes me feel safer
As an earlier poster pointed out, the Secret Service does not seem to see it that way. It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

[PugMom]

i read the article posted, very interesting, but allow me to question the report. in sandy hook, columbine & parkland--they all had some sort of emotional disturbance. these are the shootings that come to mind right away. thoughts?

[PugMom]

As an earlier poster pointed out, the Secret Service does not seem to see it that way. It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

for protection & safety purposes mainly, also for sport/target practice

[MDLNB]

You're sort of making the original poster's point. A room full of people with guns means you've got something to worry about. A room full of people without guns, means you have a lot less to worry about. The NRA tries to spin it the other way round.

For me, I'd much rather be in a store or school or a church (not that you could drag me into one of those) full of people without guns.


Actually, no. I did not "make" the original poster's point. There are exceptions to almost any situation. I am sure that most everyone in an NRA meeting feels secure knowing others are carrying. Our government via the SS has a different outlook on the situation. Protection of the asset is a different matter entirely. Ask them for their reasoning or RULES.

Personally, I have no problem with CCW individuals carrying in a church. In the past few years, there have been several church shootings. One was stopped by a man (NRA member?) with a gun. I understand some folks are in great fear of guns and worry that they may go off by themselves and harm humans. Those folks probably should not have a gun, or should take a gun safety course just to know how they work. It says a lot about someone that had to let everyone know that they would not ever be seen in a church. There's more threat of being zapped by the Holy Spirit in church than being shot in one by a gun totin' miscreant. :clap2::):pray:

[PugMom]

not sure if you guys saw the recent news report re: a 70yr old female, who was forced to use her gun to take down a home intruder. thank God she was able to defend herself & partner, lest they may be the ones being buried

[MartinSE]

I'm sorry that no one has answered your question to your satisfaction. Please allow me to answer the question that you probably already know the answer to. You CAN own a M1 tank and/or a fully automatic weapon. Google is your friend. If you apply for a federal permit and undergo a background check and pay a substantial fee, you can own the tank and/or the fully automatic weapon. And you can even call it an "assault weapon" if it pleases you. There you, you're welcome. :icon_wink::)

It would help if you took your own advice. See, you left out a little detail. The tank (M1's are not for sale) must be neutered and make street legal first. Meaning no weapon systems, barrel concreted, and all tactical equipment removed.

So, I will go with that, you are okay with the government requiring the tank be neutered, so you would not mind if they require all guns to be disabled and cripple. Barrels filled.

I know (you have said multiple times) tight you are MUCH smarter than the rest of us. If so, try finding the truth, and not just enough of the truth to support your own misconceptions, the the rest of the story.

Oh, and I will save you the trouble of replying that I didn't say I wanted to it work, I just said I wanted to own it.

Well, I said I wanted it so I would be equally armed as the governments military, since the argument I was responding to was that the 2nd was there to allow us to take back our government from rogue actors. Kind of hard to take back the government with AR15s (toys) and M1 Tanks that are crippled (can't even use it with tracks - so no off road fighting - I am sure the rogue government will help by only fighting on paved hiways.

I guess I could drive it around and run over bad guys... but then it isn't really a gun is it.

As to the fully automatic weapon -

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:

* the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
* the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
* their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).

"For example, someone can lawfully possess a machine gun made this morning if it is in connection with their duties as a government or law enforcement official, or if they have their Federal Firearms License (FFL) and have either made or possess the machine gun for possible sale to government/law enforcement personnel."

In 1934, the National Firearms Act (NFA) was passed which restricted machine gun possession, among other types of firearms.

Remember, though, if you want to possess these modern machine guns, you must be a government employee possessing the machine gun in connection with your official duties OR you must get your Federal Firearms License (FFL) and become an SOT.

As an FFL, you must also pay a special yearly tax to become a Special Occupational Taxpayer (SOT) – this allows you to purchase and sell NFA firearms (including machine guns) without paying a tax per item/transaction.

The machine guns can be banned outright based on function (because they are machine guns) or they can be banned/partially-banned based on features.

And a summary:

How to Purchase a Machine Gun as an Individual:

* Confirm that they are lawful to possess in your state

* Find a currently registered machine gun made before 1986 either at a gun shop or a private individual. You can search locally or online (but out-of-state online sales of all firearms must go to your local gun shop).

* Purchase the machine gun as an individual or through a trust – but, no, you can’t take it home yet! Trusts were popular to avoid certain requirements (fingerprints, law enforcement approval, etc.) but ATF changed the rules last year. Previously, your local Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) approval was required, but the ATF changed the rules last year to only require notification. Also, members of a trust could obtain new NFA firearms without fingerprints/photos but now every lawful possessor is required to submit them each time. These rule changes removed much of the reason to get a trust.

* Fill out an ATF Form 4 application to transfer an NFA firearm. This application will include a $200 check for your tax, your fingerprints, a passport-style photograph, and information about you and the firearm.

* Wait 9-12 months for the ATF to approve and return your paperwork.

* Take your machine-gun home and enjoy!

Since you are okay with those restrictions, I suggest we let them apply to ALL guns. How about that.

And you of course left out cruise missiles and F35 fighters. Which I would be facing when trying to take back my country. So, cherry picking, doesn't work.

My point stands.

[PugMom]

excellent thread with many thoughtful posts :ho:

[Caymus]

It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?

Maybe that neighborhood is in Chicago.

[jdulej]

i read the article posted, very interesting, but allow me to question the report. in sandy hook, columbine & parkland--they all had some sort of emotional disturbance. these are the shootings that come to mind right away. thoughts?

Not quite sure who you were addressing this to, but I'll toss in my 2 cents. IMO, there is one (and only one) reason why someone commits any sort of violent crime - because they are mentally unstable.

Why not, as a start, require anyone who wants to buy a gun to prove they are mentally stable. 99.9% would pass and go on their way with their shiny new killing machine. The .1 failures are just out of luck.

We don't seem to have any issues adding more and more restrictions to people's right to vote, this does not seem to add that much of a burden to the vast majority gun owner wannabes

[jdulej]

Maybe that neighborhood is in Chicago.
If you can get past the NYTs paywall there is an interesting article on Chicago gun violence. Here is a snippet from fact checking of Trump and Cruz at the NRA convention

The three cities with the highest gun homicide rates — Jackson, Miss.; Gary, Ind.; and St. Louis — had rates double that of Chicago’s or more. All are in states with more permissive gun laws than Illinois.

Chicago’s reputation for having the strictest gun control measures in the country is outdated. Mr. Cruz cited the city’s handgun ban — without noting that the Supreme Court nullified the ban in 2010. An appeals court also struck down a ban on carrying concealed weapons in Illinois in 2012, and the state began allowing possession of concealed guns in 2013 as part of the court decision.

Today, Illinois has tougher restrictions than most states, but it does not lead the pack, ranking No. 6

[MDLNB]

As an earlier poster pointed out, the Secret Service does not seem to see it that way. It may be one thing if you know everyone, although that begs the question - why would someone feel the need to carry a gun around in their own neighborhood?


Here's my thought on carrying in your own neighborhood. One day, my spouse was out in the yard (previous state) and a coyote started harassing her. My weapons were not available at the time, so I ran at the animal shouting at it. It retreated slowly, barking and growling as it went. After that, I made sure that I always had a weapon handy. My thought is that it is better to have protection and not need it than to need it and not have it. If you do not habitually carry your weapon all the time, who's to say when you might suddenly need it? A crazed animal, a drug influenced neighbor, an out of control domestic resulting in a frustrated gun wielding citizen....who knows? Since most or at least half my family are trained in weapons handling and have CCW, I often ask them when they take trips on their motorcycles or even in their autos, if they are carrying. It's good to remind them and gives me peace of mind that they at least have some tool for self defense. A gun against a carjacking is a great equalizer. There was one instance in Texas where a CCW lady left her gun in her truck when she had dinner with her parents in a diner that had a sign posted prohibiting guns inside. The place was held up and someone was murdered in the process (I think one or both her parents were victims?). She said later that all she could do was glance out the window and wonder why she didn't have her protection which was just a few feet away. If I have my wallet in my pocket, I have my CCW with me also. Not that I am afraid, but I am prepared to protect my family and anyone else that might need assistance in my vicinity. The school shooting demonstrates the old saying that "when seconds count, a COP is minutes away." or something like that.

[Taltarzac725]

Best Coyote Deterrents & Repellents: Protecting Your Dog From Coyotes! (https://www.k9ofmine.com/coyote-deterrents-repellents/)

We had coyotes a few years ago here and some neighbors did walk their dogs while armed with guns but there are better options against coyotes.

Here's my thought on carrying in your own neighborhood. One day, my spouse was out in the yard (previous state) and a coyote started harassing her. My weapons were not available at the time, so I ran at the animal shouting at it. It retreated slowly, barking and growling as it went. After that, I made sure that I always had a weapon handy. My thought is that it is better to have protection and not need it than to need it and not have it. If you do not habitually carry your weapon all the time, who's to say when you might suddenly need it? A crazed animal, a drug influenced neighbor, an out of control domestic resulting in a frustrated gun wielding citizen....who knows? Since most or at least half my family are trained in weapons handling and have CCW, I often ask them when they take trips on their motorcycles or even in their autos, if they are carrying. It's good to remind them and gives me peace of mind that they at least have some tool for self defense. A gun against a carjacking is a great equalizer. There was one instance in Texas where a CCW lady left her gun in her truck when she had dinner with her parents in a diner that had a sign posted prohibiting guns inside. The place was held up and someone was murdered in the process (I think one or both her parents were victims?). She said later that all she could do was glance out the window and wonder why she didn't have her protection which was just a few feet away. If I have my wallet in my pocket, I have my CCW with me also. Not that I am afraid, but I am prepared to protect my family and anyone else that might need assistance in my vicinity. The school shooting demonstrates the old saying that "when seconds count, a COP is minutes away." or something like that.

[MDLNB]

It would help if you took your own advice. See, you left out a little detail. The tank (M1's are not for sale) must be neutered and make street legal first. Meaning no weapon systems, barrel concreted, and all tactical equipment removed.

So, I will go with that, you are okay with the government requiring the tank be neutered, so you would not mind if they require all guns to be disabled and cripple. Barrels filled.

I know (you have said multiple times) tight you are MUCH smarter than the rest of us. If so, try finding the truth, and not just enough of the truth to support your own misconceptions, the the rest of the story.

Oh, and I will save you the trouble of replying that I didn't say I wanted to it work, I just said I wanted to own it.

Well, I said I wanted it so I would be equally armed as the governments military, since the argument I was responding to was that the 2nd was there to allow us to take back our government from rogue actors. Kind of hard to take back the government with AR15s (toys) and M1 Tanks that are crippled (can't even use it with tracks - so no off road fighting - I am sure the rogue government will help by only fighting on paved hiways.

I guess I could drive it around and run over bad guys... but then it isn't really a gun is it.

As to the fully automatic weapon -

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:

* the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
* the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
* their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).

"For example, someone can lawfully possess a machine gun made this morning if it is in connection with their duties as a government or law enforcement official, or if they have their Federal Firearms License (FFL) and have either made or possess the machine gun for possible sale to government/law enforcement personnel."

In 1934, the National Firearms Act (NFA) was passed which restricted machine gun possession, among other types of firearms.

Remember, though, if you want to possess these modern machine guns, you must be a government employee possessing the machine gun in connection with your official duties OR you must get your Federal Firearms License (FFL) and become an SOT.

As an FFL, you must also pay a special yearly tax to become a Special Occupational Taxpayer (SOT) – this allows you to purchase and sell NFA firearms (including machine guns) without paying a tax per item/transaction.

The machine guns can be banned outright based on function (because they are machine guns) or they can be banned/partially-banned based on features.

And a summary:

How to Purchase a Machine Gun as an Individual:

* Confirm that they are lawful to possess in your state

* Find a currently registered machine gun made before 1986 either at a gun shop or a private individual. You can search locally or online (but out-of-state online sales of all firearms must go to your local gun shop).

* Purchase the machine gun as an individual or through a trust – but, no, you can’t take it home yet! Trusts were popular to avoid certain requirements (fingerprints, law enforcement approval, etc.) but ATF changed the rules last year. Previously, your local Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) approval was required, but the ATF changed the rules last year to only require notification. Also, members of a trust could obtain new NFA firearms without fingerprints/photos but now every lawful possessor is required to submit them each time. These rule changes removed much of the reason to get a trust.

* Fill out an ATF Form 4 application to transfer an NFA firearm. This application will include a $200 check for your tax, your fingerprints, a passport-style photograph, and information about you and the firearm.

* Wait 9-12 months for the ATF to approve and return your paperwork.

* Take your machine-gun home and enjoy!

Since you are okay with those restrictions, I suggest we let them apply to ALL guns. How about that.

And you of course left out cruise missiles and F35 fighters. Which I would be facing when trying to take back my country. So, cherry picking, doesn't work.

My point stands.


I answered your question and you preferred to be facetious. Ok.

I knew an old Gunny in the Marines that once said to us, "don't come complaining to me about a problem unless you also have a solution." Of course, when I say "old" he was probably in his 30's or 40's...:1rotfl:
Bad people are the problem and good people are the solution.
Guns are not the problem, only the weapon of choice for the bad people. Guns are also the possible choice of good people as a solution to bad people using a gun to perpetrate bad things. If you don't like guns (not you specifically) then solve the people problem before they resort to acting on their malicious intent.

[MDLNB]

Best Coyote Deterrents & Repellents: Protecting Your Dog From Coyotes! (https://www.k9ofmine.com/coyote-deterrents-repellents/)

We had coyotes a few years ago here and some neighbors did walk their dogs while armed with guns but there are better options against coyotes.


Yes, there are OTHER options for coyotes, and that was just an example. I love animals so I would hesitate to use a firearm on an animal unless it was a matter of hunting for food or absolute defense. Same with people as far as absolute defense.....not hunger...:1rotfl:

[MDLNB]

Not quite sure who you were addressing this to, but I'll toss in my 2 cents. IMO, there is one (and only one) reason why someone commits any sort of violent crime - because they are mentally unstable.

Why not, as a start, require anyone who wants to buy a gun to prove they are mentally stable. 99.9% would pass and go on their way with their shiny new killing machine. The .1 failures are just out of luck.

We don't seem to have any issues adding more and more restrictions to people's right to vote, this does not seem to add that much of a burden to the vast majority gun owner wannabes


You made two very good points. Why not prove they are mentally stable? Who decides and wouldn't they be able to fool the person making the judgement?

You mentioned "more and more" restrictions on voting. What restrictions? The Constitution states that ONLY American citizens may vote in national elections. Is providing proof of citizenship and identification a restriction? But, we do not need to go off subject, right?

I believe that a half way decent background check is a form of proving a person is mentally stable, IF done properly. However, as many know of the gov's background check for a security clearance, background investigations are very expensive and can cost as much as $20K or more. Even then, some sneak through.

[Taltarzac725]

Noticed that the Uvalde mass murderer had an obscene amount of ammunition on him. Without bullets any rifle is just a club.

Many gun enthusiasts I know reload their spent cartridges. Instead Of Buying New Ammunition, These Gun Enthusiasts Recycle | Texas Standard (https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/instead-of-buying-new-ammunition-these-gun-enthusiasts-recycle/)

[Lottoguy]

Your wrong about "nothing will change". It is changing and for the worse. Vote them out!

[Lottoguy]

Locking school doors could be asking for more trouble. What if a fire starts? Nut jobs are saying "harden the schools and have one entrance and one exit". What happens if there is a fire?

[bob47]

Not quite sure who you were addressing this to, but I'll toss in my 2 cents. IMO, there is one (and only one) reason why someone commits any sort of violent crime - because they are mentally unstable.

Why not, as a start, require anyone who wants to buy a gun to prove they are mentally stable. 99.9% would pass and go on their way with their shiny new killing machine. The .1 failures are just out of luck.

We don't seem to have any issues adding more and more restrictions to people's right to vote, this does not seem to add that much of a burden to the vast majority gun owner wannabes

One problem is, somebody may be mentally stable today (if that can even be determined) but after some crisis in the future, they become unstable. And they already own a gun capable of killing 10s of people very quickly.

Perhaps there really are multiple sides to this problem that need to be addressed and one of them is the destructive capability of the weapons people are allowed to own.

[Ken Nelson]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcpsnrxHdCc

This is how it is done!

[jimbomaybe]

Maybe that neighborhood is in Chicago.

Great city Chicago you get the casualty report in the morning with the days weather

[jimbomaybe]

See it is hard to solve something when you are looking in the wrong places. Mental health is a red herring being pushed by the parties with a vested interest. I can post links to dozens of studies by top psychologists in the world (but I wont because I have been given a vacation for posting too many links - spamming they called it). And they all come to the same conclusion - summarized by this:

Are All Mass Shooters Mentally Ill? (https://www.michiganpsychologicalassociation.org/index.php?option=com_dailyplanetblog&view=entry&year=2021&month=02&day=28&id=72:are-all-mass-shooters-mentally-ill-)

Here is the link, but I know most wont bother to read it, since it might disturb peoples world view. If you are interested in truth and not propaganda as so many claim - the take a look.

"They discovered that only 11% of all mass murderers (including shooters) and only 8% of mass shooters had a serious mental illness. They also found that mass shooters in the United States were more likely to have legal histories, use recreational drugs, abuse alcohol, and have histories of non-psychotic psychiatric or neurologic symptoms."

Let me repeat that, 8% of mass shooters have mental health problems associated with the shooting.

According to John Hopkins Medicine , 26% of Americans 18 and older have some form of diagnosable mental health.

Repeat that - 8% of shooters are mentally ill, 26% of the general population are mentally ill. Hmm.

So, there is an interesting anomaly here - MORE people that are NOT mass murders have some form of mental illness than the mass shooter. The shooters would seem to be "healthier". (that would be a false comparison, for those paying attention - since there are very few shooters so the sample size is very small.)

Mental Health Disorder Statistics | Johns Hopkins Medicine (https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/mental-health-disorder-statistics)

According to other sources, 20% of the worlds population has mental health issues.

So, PLEASE, since you claim mental health explains mass shootings and school murders, PLEASE explain why the US is the ONLY country experiencing regular school shooting. Great Britain hasn't had one since 1996 with they banned most guns. Coincidence?

PLEASE explain WHY there are not MORE shootings since the general population has 3 times as much mental illness as the shooter population?

There, Did I repeat it enough times?

I won't wait for an answer, since EVERY single person I have asked, failed to respond with an answer. Typically if they answer at all they just deflect with "things are different here - yeah they are different. We have 400 million guns on circulation. And in this particular case virtually no requirements to buy a gun except a government ID, be 18, and breathing. (Oh and a pocket full of money)

I think you have done a good job of demonstrating the lack of insight of our mental health experts have on human behavior

[MDLNB]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcpsnrxHdCc

This is how it is done!


Great idea! And a good investment. $400K is reasonable for protecting children.

[jimjamuser]

So how many guns do you think the government should “allow” citizens to own?

Problem is mental illness.

But again if people couldn’t get their hands on guns, And they were hellbent on harming others, not having a gun wouldn’t get in their way.
🥃🥃
The shooter at Robb Elementry did NOT shoot or kill anyone when he was 17 years old or younger. It was only when he turned 18 and magically could buy MAN-KILLING guns that HE turned into a mass murderer.
..........That is the logic that I base MY OPINION on - that to solve the mass murder problem - you have to do SOMETHING about the GUNS problem. The US is awash in excessive GUNS, which has led to excessive GUN violence. Excessive as compared to other countries. And if this GUN problem is not solved, then more GUNS will be purchased and that will equal MORE MASS MURDERS.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Yeah.....no. There were a couple of prior posts in this thread that explained why the gun ban was put in place for the upcoming convention when others made similar incorrect statements.

The Secret Service is there to protect whoever they're charged with protecting. If the threat is removed (no firearms allowed) then they don't need the Secret Service there. If they need the Secret Service there, it's because it's that presumption of safety doesn't exist.

If everyone was allowed to carry at the Convention, they wouldn't need the secret service, would they?

Because ALL OF THOSE GOOD GUYS would be protecting each other from that one bad guy.

But if the secret service is needed afterall, then the above sentence is untrue.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Locking school doors could be asking for more trouble. What if a fire starts? Nut jobs are saying "harden the schools and have one entrance and one exit". What happens if there is a fire?

What happens if it's someone who is IN the building creating the problem? Remember - guns don't kill people. Could be some kid got into the archery equipment and is shooting folks with a crossbow. Could be they got ahold of exacto knives from the arts department and is throwing them at random students. Could be some kid got into the janitor closet and is spraying everyone in the hallway with bleach.

[Madelaine Amee]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcpsnrxHdCc

This is how it is done!

Excellent video, thanks for showing it. We are becoming immune to this strange new world we live it, but the cost is a drop in the bucket and should be installed in all public places. There is more than enough money in this country for this type of protection. Maybe some of our millionaire politicians would like to chip in :icon_wink:

[MDLNB]

The shooter at Robb Elementry did NOT shoot or kill anyone when he was 17 years old or younger. It was only when he turned 18 and magically could buy MAN-KILLING guns that HE turned into a mass murderer.
..........That is the logic that I base MY OPINION on - that to solve the mass murder problem - you have to do SOMETHING about the GUNS problem. The US is awash in excessive GUNS, which has led to excessive GUN violence. Excessive as compared to other countries. And if this GUN problem is not solved, then more GUNS will be purchased and that will equal MORE MASS MURDERS.


So, you are saying that if we limit the amount of guns owned to say one gun per person, we will eliminate mass killing? How about one rifle and one pistol per person? Is that too much? Maybe one 22 cal and one 30 cal rifle and maybe one 9mm and one 38cal pistol? Then since the more cars on the road, the more accidents that happen, we will allow only one car per household? Or maybe one car and one motorcycle?



Just a point about ages of shooters: Statista says:
"Between 1970 and June 16, 2020, 175 school shootings were perpetrated by 17-year-olds. 16-year-olds perpetrated the second highest number of school shootings, with 163 shootings." Just adding to your age related statement. I don't think that age is that relevant to mental health. Although, I haven't heard much in respect to senior citizens perpetrating mass murders in public schools. Of course, I really haven't researched that age group.

[MDLNB]

Excellent video, thanks for showing it. We are becoming immune to this strange new world we live it, but the cost is a drop in the bucket and should be installed in all public places. There is more than enough money in this country for this type of protection. Maybe some of our millionaire politicians would like to chip in :icon_wink:


Good idea about the last suggestion.....:coolsmiley:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Actually, no. I did not "make" the original poster's point. There are exceptions to almost any situation. I am sure that most everyone in an NRA meeting feels secure knowing others are carrying. Our government via the SS has a different outlook on the situation. Protection of the asset is a different matter entirely. Ask them for their reasoning or RULES.

Personally, I have no problem with CCW individuals carrying in a church. In the past few years, there have been several church shootings. One was stopped by a man (NRA member?) with a gun. I understand some folks are in great fear of guns and worry that they may go off by themselves and harm humans. Those folks probably should not have a gun, or should take a gun safety course just to know how they work. It says a lot about someone that had to let everyone know that they would not ever be seen in a church. There's more threat of being zapped by the Holy Spirit in church than being shot in one by a gun totin' miscreant. :clap2::):pray:

The irony is lost on some of you.

Regardless of which entity is doing the actual ordering of the ban -

The ban is imposed on a forum where a guy is going to speak about his opinion that there should be no bans. And he'll be able to make this statement, from the safety of the only people who are allowed to not abide by that ban, because their job is to protect him personally.

I'm not for banning guns. I'm pro 2A. I'm also pro-non-hypocrisy. The guy who is going to speak, should not be there at all, if the rules are applying ONLY to his personal taxpayer-provided bodyguards.

[MDLNB]

The Secret Service is there to protect whoever they're charged with protecting. If the threat is removed (no firearms allowed) then they don't need the Secret Service there. If they need the Secret Service there, it's because it's that presumption of safety doesn't exist.

If everyone was allowed to carry at the Convention, they wouldn't need the secret service, would they?

Because ALL OF THOSE GOOD GUYS would be protecting each other from that one bad guy.

But if the secret service is needed afterall, then the above sentence is untrue.


That doesn't make sense. Are you saying that ALL NRA members or attendees are "good guys?" You don't know how the SS guys work? You don't know their policies or SOP? Just kidding, I know you were just being facetious. :icon_wink:

[MDLNB]

Locking school doors could be asking for more trouble. What if a fire starts? Nut jobs are saying "harden the schools and have one entrance and one exit". What happens if there is a fire?


Fire exits are locked to those on the outside. In case of emergency, you push the lever and the door opens. Emergency services have the ability to access the entrances also. However, a remote control from the office can be utilized if they wish to lock and unlock doors by use of a button. Many schools in the inner cities lock all doors to keep the drug pushers out during school session.

[jimjamuser]

It is painful to read how uneducated some are when it comes to guns. A new AR platform ban is a joke. Below is 2 pictures of the SAME firearm. One has a wood stock and the other is scary black. They both shoot the same round. They both can change their magazine capacity. They are equally effective at doing their job. So what is an AR.......a normal gun in a costume!
Good post and good picture. That IS true, both guns have an equal semi-auto ACTION and both have about the same POTENTIAL to kill humans. That is why Australia encouraged their civilians to use bolt-action rifles INSTEAD of semi-auto actions and brought their MASS-murders down to about zero. The US should look to the Australians as an example of eliminating MASS-MURDER, while still allowing all their law-abiding citizens to own guns for legal purposes.
.........We KNOW that we have a problem. Other countries SOLVED the problem. Their children do NOT have the same FEAR when entering their schools as US children do. WE OWE it to the children to do the RIGHT thing for a change.

[Sarah_W]

Please3 explain this rationale.

Guns make us safe. More gun make us safer, Gun free zones are worthless because makes it easier to kill us.

Trump will be there, so it is too hard to keep him safe unless we ban guns. What could be safer for Trump than a room full of ardent supporters packing?

The hypocrisy is blatant. Everyday in every way we are told we need more guns to make us safer, but Trump needs more guns to keep him safer from his own supporters?

I don't think it is hypocrisy. The NRA as well as the attendees are not against guns being at the convention. I've been to NRA conventions myself and had not problem carrying my handgun. It is the Secret Service who is dictating that no guns be present. That is the case at every single event that a person attends who they are charged to protect. Where any former President speaks, it will have to be gun free. As we can see from the recent headline where some Iraqi's were conspiring to kill George W. Bush. They don't have to be a sitting President to be at risk and the Secret Service will reduce as much risk as possible.

[Trayderjoe]

The Secret Service is there to protect whoever they're charged with protecting. If the threat is removed (no firearms allowed) then they don't need the Secret Service there. If they need the Secret Service there, it's because it's that presumption of safety doesn't exist.

If everyone was allowed to carry at the Convention, they wouldn't need the secret service, would they?

Because ALL OF THOSE GOOD GUYS would be protecting each other from that one bad guy.

But if the secret service is needed afterall, then the above sentence is untrue.

Here is a link (https://www.secretservice.gov/) to the Secret Service website. It might help, but then again.....

[jimjamuser]

You're sort of making the original poster's point. A room full of people with guns means you've got something to worry about. A room full of people without guns, means you have a lot less to worry about. The NRA tries to spin it the other way round.

For me, I'd much rather be in a store or school or a church (not that you could drag me into one of those) full of people without guns.
Agreed! Good logic!

[Sarah_W]

See it is hard to solve something when you are looking in the wrong places. Mental health is a red herring being pushed by the parties with a vested interest. I can post links to dozens of studies by top psychologists in the world (but I wont because I have been given a vacation for posting too many links - spamming they called it). And they all come to the same conclusion - summarized by this:

Are All Mass Shooters Mentally Ill? (https://www.michiganpsychologicalassociation.org/index.php?option=com_dailyplanetblog&view=entry&year=2021&month=02&day=28&id=72:are-all-mass-shooters-mentally-ill-)

Here is the link, but I know most wont bother to read it, since it might disturb peoples world view. If you are interested in truth and not propaganda as so many claim - the take a look.

"They discovered that only 11% of all mass murderers (including shooters) and only 8% of mass shooters had a serious mental illness. They also found that mass shooters in the United States were more likely to have legal histories, use recreational drugs, abuse alcohol, and have histories of non-psychotic psychiatric or neurologic symptoms."

Let me repeat that, 8% of mass shooters have mental health problems associated with the shooting.

According to John Hopkins Medicine , 26% of Americans 18 and older have some form of diagnosable mental health.

Repeat that - 8% of shooters are mentally ill, 26% of the general population are mentally ill. Hmm.

So, there is an interesting anomaly here - MORE people that are NOT mass murders have some form of mental illness than the mass shooter. The shooters would seem to be "healthier". (that would be a false comparison, for those paying attention - since there are very few shooters so the sample size is very small.)

Mental Health Disorder Statistics | Johns Hopkins Medicine (https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/mental-health-disorder-statistics)

According to other sources, 20% of the worlds population has mental health issues.

So, PLEASE, since you claim mental health explains mass shootings and school murders, PLEASE explain why the US is the ONLY country experiencing regular school shooting. Great Britain hasn't had one since 1996 with they banned most guns. Coincidence?

PLEASE explain WHY there are not MORE shootings since the general population has 3 times as much mental illness as the shooter population?

There, Did I repeat it enough times?

I won't wait for an answer, since EVERY single person I have asked, failed to respond with an answer. Typically if they answer at all they just deflect with "things are different here - yeah they are different. We have 400 million guns on circulation. And in this particular case virtually no requirements to buy a gun except a government ID, be 18, and breathing. (Oh and a pocket full of money)

I, for one, would not suggest that mental illness is representative of all mass shooters. There are more than one assignable cause for why someone would kill a group of people.

In no particular order here are some I can think of.

1. Mental illness
2. Hatred of a group of people (Race, Religion, and other characteristics)
3. Hatred or anger of a person within a group in attendance of an event
4. Copy cat killer
5. Political enemy
6. Genocide
7. Revenge

[Taltarzac725]

I, for one, would not suggest that mental illness is representative of all mass shooters. There are more than one assignable cause for why someone would kill a group of people.

In no particular order here are some I can think of.

1. Mental illness
2. Hatred of a group of people (Race, Religion, and other characteristics)
3. Hatred or anger of a person within a group in attendance of an event
4. Copy cat killer
5. Political enemy
6. Genocide
7. Revenge

One of the Seven Deadly Sins is usually involved. And drugs and therapy can only do so much with mental illness especially if the patient stops taking the drugs. Seven deadly sins - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_deadly_sins)

[PugMom]

Not quite sure who you were addressing this to, but I'll toss in my 2 cents. IMO, there is one (and only one) reason why someone commits any sort of violent crime - because they are mentally unstable.

Why not, as a start, require anyone who wants to buy a gun to prove they are mentally stable. 99.9% would pass and go on their way with their shiny new killing machine. The .1 failures are just out of luck.

We don't seem to have any issues adding more and more restrictions to people's right to vote, this does not seem to add that much of a burden to the vast majority gun owner wannabes

it's such a good & simple idea that just may work! but we have to discuss private sales then. how would/should we handle that? thx!

[jdulej]

I, for one, would not suggest that mental illness is representative of all mass shooters. There are more than one assignable cause for why someone would kill a group of people.

In no particular order here are some I can think of.

1. Mental illness
2. Hatred of a group of people (Race, Religion, and other characteristics)
3. Hatred or anger of a person within a group in attendance of an event
4. Copy cat killer
5. Political enemy
6. Genocide
7. Revenge

IMO, anyone who would actually kill others because of 2-7 above is mentally ill. The difference in the US is how easy it is for said person to act out their illness with mass killing weapons. The impact is orders of magnitude greater than someone who only has access to less destructive weapons, which is the case in the rest of the 1st world.
This may not be the technical definition of mentally ill, but it works for me - anyone who goes to the extreme of killing others for ANY reason (other than the immediate need for self-defense) has got a screw loose and should not be allowed to own a gun.
I gave up on any thought of actually banning guns a long time ago. I do think there is room to tighten rules around chains of ownership and liability - if good old uncle George gives little Jonny, who likes to torture animals, a gun for his birthday he shares liability for whatever Jonny does with it.

[Taltarzac725]

it's such a good & simple idea that just may work! but we have to discuss private sales then. how would/should we handle that? thx!

My brother's wife's brother was a very studious man in India while a follower of some religious leader over there. His mentor died and he moved in with them here in the States and eventually got hooked on hot dogs and two pistols with a very high rate of fire. It was not until after he committed suicide that my brother found out just how crazy he had become when the police were looking over his things at his apartment. He thought that someone had taken over my brother and his wife and that they were not even human. My brother had thrown him out of their house a few years before he committed suicide because he refused to get rid of those pistols while living in their home. They had tried to get him help while they had him in their home but he always knew just what to say to avoid commitment into a mental health facility.

[dewilson58]

I, for one, would not suggest that mental illness is representative of all mass shooters. There are more than one assignable cause for why someone would kill a group of people.

In no particular order here are some I can think of.

1. Mental illness
2. Hatred of a group of people (Race, Religion, and other characteristics)
3. Hatred or anger of a person within a group in attendance of an event
4. Copy cat killer
5. Political enemy
6. Genocide
7. Revenge

:ohdear::ohdear:

Doesn't everyone who murders have a mental illness?????....except "drug induced".

[jdulej]

:ohdear::ohdear:

Doesn't everyone who murders have a mental illness?????....except "drug induced".

Yes.

[Taltarzac725]

:ohdear::ohdear:

Doesn't everyone who murders have a mental illness?????....except "drug induced".

No. Many kill for money, over love lost or gained, in the heat of passion, and many, many other reasons. Why Do People Kill? 15 Motives for Murder (https://www.bryndonovan.com/2022/02/16/why-do-people-kill-15-motives-for-murder/)

Many are not mentally ill when they do this evil act. Some are, though.

[Sarah_W]

:ohdear::ohdear:

Doesn't everyone who murders have a mental illness?????....except "drug induced".

According to the links provided in the post that I responded the answer is no. I'm pretty sure being a racist is not considered a mental illness. Neither is hatred.


This story isn't making the news although it should.

Charleston, West Virginia, 5/25/22

On Wednesday evening a family was having a birthday-graduation party with 40 people in attendance. Dennis Butler drove through the neighborhood and was confronted and warned about speeding down the street because children were present. He left the area and returned later with an AR style rifle and began shooting at the party goers. A woman attending the party and was armed, as a lawful conceal carry holder. She immediately engaged the shooter, striking him several times and he died at the scene. Nobody at the part was struck. This woman stopped a mass shooting (by definition) from happening, but the news networks will not carry the story.

Dennis Butler was a convicted felon and therefore prohibited from having firearms.

[Taltarzac725]

Armed partygoer shoots, kills man who confronted group with rifle, police say (https://www.wsaz.com/2022/05/26/person-detained-after-shots-fired-call/)

It has made some news stations.

According to the links provided in the post that I responded the answer is no. I'm pretty sure being a racist is not considered a mental illness. Neither is hatred.


This story isn't making the news although it should.

Charleston, West Virginia, 5/25/22

On Wednesday evening a family was having a birthday-graduation party with 40 people in attendance. Dennis Butler drove through the neighborhood and was confronted and warned about speeding down the street because children were present. He left the area and returned later with an AR style rifle and began shooting at the party goers. A woman attending the party and was armed, as a lawful conceal carry holder. She immediately engaged the shooter, striking him several times and he died at the scene. Nobody at the part was struck. This woman stopped a mass shooting (by definition) from happening, but the news networks will not carry the story.

Dennis Butler was a convicted felon and therefore prohibited from having firearms.

[Stu from NYC]

According to the links provided in the post that I responded the answer is no. I'm pretty sure being a racist is not considered a mental illness. Neither is hatred.


This story isn't making the news although it should.

Charleston, West Virginia, 5/25/22

On Wednesday evening a family was having a birthday-graduation party with 40 people in attendance. Dennis Butler drove through the neighborhood and was confronted and warned about speeding down the street because children were present. He left the area and returned later with an AR style rifle and began shooting at the party goers. A woman attending the party and was armed, as a lawful conceal carry holder. She immediately engaged the shooter, striking him several times and he died at the scene. Nobody at the part was struck. This woman stopped a mass shooting (by definition) from happening, but the news networks will not carry the story.

Dennis Butler was a convicted felon and therefore prohibited from having firearms.

The woman is a hero and should be applauded. Unfortunately her actions did not fit the narrative that news wants to present so they ignored it. Sad.

[Number 10 GI]

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

Sad

I don't know what a M50 machine gun is. There is the original M2, 50 caliber machine gun and you can legally own one. You will have to find a Class III gun dealer, fill out an application to purchase a machine gun, pay a $200 fee and if approved you can buy one from the dealer, if you can find one for sale. The big hurdle to owing a machine gun is the purchase price, usually in the multiple thousands of dollars and ammo is around $5.00 + a round.

[Number 10 GI]

Good luck defending yourself against F-35 with laser guided missiles..

SAD

Did you ever hear about a group of rebels called the Viet Cong? They were formerly known as the Viet Minh who fought against Japanese and French occupation. Guess who won? The name changed to the Viet Cong and they fought the U.S. for over a decade. They were bombed by F4 Phantoms, B52 bombers, sprayed with Agent Orange, attacked by Huey helicopters, Cobra gunships and shot at by artillery howitzers and 16 inch battleship guns. The Viet Cong had no tanks, artillery, fighters planes, or helicopters, guess who won?

[Number 10 GI]

The we are not like Australia, Sweden, and etc.........that part sounds like some kind of "American Exceptionalism" rant to me. All those countries mentioned have stronger middle classes than the US does today. We have the largest wealth disparity of all the 1st world countries. I guess that is some sort of "American Exceptionalism".
........And the US economic realities lead to social dysfunction and even to such extremes of Mass Murder - because there is little money set aside for mental health and other social programs as in other countries. Texas recently lowered their budget for mental health. Is Texas actively trying to produce MORE mass murderers?

Crime should have been rampant during the Great Depression but from what I've read about that period of economic catastrophe, there wasn't a drastic rise in crime.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I don't think it is hypocrisy. The NRA as well as the attendees are not against guns being at the convention. I've been to NRA conventions myself and had not problem carrying my handgun. It is the Secret Service who is dictating that no guns be present. That is the case at every single event that a person attends who they are charged to protect. Where any former President speaks, it will have to be gun free. As we can see from the recent headline where some Iraqi's were conspiring to kill George W. Bush. They don't have to be a sitting President to be at risk and the Secret Service will reduce as much risk as possible.

If I were the NRA, and the Secret Service said I wasn't allowed to have open carry at ALL of my convention, including a speaking engagement where they were present to protect only ONE singular person exclusively - I would tell that singular person he is not welcome in my convention.

Carrying a firearm is supposedly for self-protection, and to protect those around you. Either you're for it, or you're not. If you're for it, you wouldn't allow a handful of people to order you to put your firearms away so that they can protect ONE person only.

[Number 10 GI]

Shooting deer and shooting watermelons or punching holes in paper are all OK gun activities with me. And protecting your home and castle. I draw the line at mass murder of human beings with GUNS designed mainly to kill human beings. Those guns are low recoil, 22 caliber, high velocity, high magazine capacity, and military-style rifles.
.......Government tyranny can best be prevented by votes, not bullets. And if that need ever EVEN happened, it could be stopped just as well with bolt action and single-shot rifles.
.........Australia and New Zealand will NOT FALL to government tyranny just because they don't want semi-automatics in the hands of civilians.

The long bow was a devastating weapon used by the English army. Armies of those times had huge wooden hammers called War Hammers that crushed skulls and shattered bones. The Mace, a large iron ball with spikes that was attached to a chain and swung by the soldier penetrating medieval armor crushing skulls and shattered bones. All kinds of knives and swords have been used as a weapon of war.

Nearly every firearm that has been made was a weapon of war so claiming the AR 15 is a weapon of war doesn't make it any different that say an M1 Carbine. In case you don't know, the M1 Carbine was a semi automatic rifle and the M2 Carbine was full automatic. The M1 and M2 carbines originally came with 15 round magazines and later in the war, 30 round magazines Carbines were sold in the millions as surplus after the war and how in many "mass shootings" have you ever heard about them being used?

You totally ignore the fact that kings and dictators over the centuries have banned the ownership of weapons by their subjects. They didn't want anybody challenging their power. If you don't think our government would never turn into a dictatorship you are totally naive when it comes to human nature and the desire for power.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

According to the links provided in the post that I responded the answer is no. I'm pretty sure being a racist is not considered a mental illness. Neither is hatred.


This story isn't making the news although it should.

Charleston, West Virginia, 5/25/22

On Wednesday evening a family was having a birthday-graduation party with 40 people in attendance. Dennis Butler drove through the neighborhood and was confronted and warned about speeding down the street because children were present. He left the area and returned later with an AR style rifle and began shooting at the party goers. A woman attending the party and was armed, as a lawful conceal carry holder. She immediately engaged the shooter, striking him several times and he died at the scene. Nobody at the part was struck. This woman stopped a mass shooting (by definition) from happening, but the news networks will not carry the story.

Dennis Butler was a convicted felon and therefore prohibited from having firearms.

The bolded statement is untrue. Once again - a simple google search is all it took to find out you were wrong.

ABC News, WaPo, the AP, CBS News, heck it's gotten out to the UK with the BBS and the Saudi Gazette. It's not only news, it's international news.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The woman is a hero and should be applauded. Unfortunately her actions did not fit the narrative that news wants to present so they ignored it. Sad.

Unfortunately you chose to believe a stranger on an internet forum rather than check the claim for yourself. If you had, you would've discovered it DID get covered - by the Networks, the National press, and even the International press.

ABC presented it 2 days ago. Fox didn't get to it til yesterday, right along with the Saudi Gazette.

[Taltarzac725]

Did you ever hear about a group of rebels called the Viet Cong? They were formerly known as the Viet Minh who fought against Japanese and French occupation. Guess who won? The name changed to the Viet Cong and they fought the U.S. for over a decade. They were bombed by F4 Phantoms, B52 bombers, sprayed with Agent Orange, attacked by Huey helicopters, Cobra gunships and shot at by artillery howitzers and 16 inch battleship guns. The Viet Cong had no tanks, artillery, fighters planes, or helicopters, guess who won?

They had a huge jungle and were very adept at guerrilla warfare. Guerrilla warfare - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare)

History of guerrilla warfare - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_guerrilla_warfare)

[Number 10 GI]

To further follow up on the abusive power of government, in England there are Hate Speech laws that can get you prison time. Here is an excerpt from WikiPedia explaining the law:

Hate speech laws in England and Wales are found in several statutes. Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, gender reassignment, or sexual orientation is forbidden.[1][2][3][4] Any communication which is threatening or abusive, and is intended to harass, alarm, or distress someone is forbidden.[5] The penalties for hate speech include fines, imprisonment, or both.[6]

The Police and CPS have formulated a definition of hate crimes and hate incidents, with hate speech forming a subset of these. Something is a hate incident if the victim or anyone else think it was motivated by hostility or prejudice based on: disability, race, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation. A hate incident becomes a hate crime if it crosses the boundary of criminality.[7]

Interpretation of the law is pretty wide open to whomever is in power. What if we had this law on the books, which would violate the 1st Amendment, and a sitting president decided that any speech criticizing his/her policies was Hate Speech? There are many people in this country who believe we should have such a law. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is why the 2nd Amendment was written into the Constitution.

[Taltarzac725]

To further follow up on the abusive power of government, in England there are Hate Speech laws that can get you prison time. Here is an excerpt from WikiPedia explaining the law:

Hate speech laws in England and Wales are found in several statutes. Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, gender reassignment, or sexual orientation is forbidden.[1][2][3][4] Any communication which is threatening or abusive, and is intended to harass, alarm, or distress someone is forbidden.[5] The penalties for hate speech include fines, imprisonment, or both.[6]

The Police and CPS have formulated a definition of hate crimes and hate incidents, with hate speech forming a subset of these. Something is a hate incident if the victim or anyone else think it was motivated by hostility or prejudice based on: disability, race, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation. A hate incident becomes a hate crime if it crosses the boundary of criminality.[7]

Interpretation of the law is pretty wide open to whomever is in power. What if we had this law on the books, which would violate the 1st Amendment, and a sitting president decided that any speech criticizing his/her policies was Hate Speech? There are many people in this country who believe we should have such a law. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is why the 2nd Amendment was written into the Constitution.

This might be of interest.

Hate Speech and Hate Crime | Advocacy, Legislation & Issues (https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/hate)

[Number 10 GI]

They had a huge jungle and were very adept at guerrilla warfare. Guerrilla warfare - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare)

History of guerrilla warfare - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_guerrilla_warfare)

We have urban jungles where criminals hide out and avoid arrest by the authorities so why couldn't guerrillas hide out there also? How do the middle eastern guerrilla fighters avoid being wiped out by the government's military? They live in a wide open desert!

Do you really believe that the Viet Cong were born with the ability to be guerrillas? They were trained, just like the Irish Republican Army, the Viet Cong, and all the Muslim terrorists.

[Number 10 GI]

Here is an interesting bit of firearm history a friend sent me:

"A hundred and twelve years ago, in 1907...our great grandparents were first able to the semi-auto Winchester Model 1907.
This is a gun they could buy from a Sears catalogue and have delivered via US Post. It was/ is a semi-automatic, high powered centerfire rifle, with detachable, high capacity magazine.
About 400,000 semi-automatic rifles were produced before WW2. Civilians had hundreds of thousands of these for 40 years, while US soldiers were still being issued old fashioned bolt action rifles.
The 1907 fired just as fast as an AR15 or AK47 and the bullet (.351 Winchester) was actually larger than those fired by the more modern looking weapons..
The ONLY functional difference between the 1907 and a controversial and much feared AR15 is the modern black plastic stock.

The semi auto, so-called "assault rifle" is 110 years old. It isnt new in any way.
The semi auto rifle was not a weapon of war. The government MADE IT a weapon of war 40 years after civilians had them.
The semi-auto can be safely owned by civilians. The proof is that literally 3 generations of adults owned and used them responsibly and no one ever even noticed.
Want to fix the horror of mass shootings? Fix the things that have changed in society for the worse in the last 50 years."

As I pointed out earlier, after WWII millions of semi automatic M1 Carbines were sold to the American public with 15 and 30 round magazines. You could buy them from catalogs and gun magazine ads and have them shipped directly to your home by the US Postal Service. Using all the illogic in this thread there should have been hundreds of shootings using the Model 1907 and M1 Carbine. What changed? Society and moral values have changed and not for the good. So easy to blame an inanimate object than to work on correcting the real problem. Gun bans, mental pablum for simple minds.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Here is an interesting bit of firearm history a friend sent me:

"A hundred and twelve years ago, in 1907...our great grandparents were first able to the semi-auto Winchester Model 1907.
This is a gun they could buy from a Sears catalogue and have delivered via US Post. It was/ is a semi-automatic, high powered centerfire rifle, with detachable, high capacity magazine.
About 400,000 semi-automatic rifles were produced before WW2. Civilians had hundreds of thousands of these for 40 years, while US soldiers were still being issued old fashioned bolt action rifles.
The 1907 fired just as fast as an AR15 or AK47 and the bullet (.351 Winchester) was actually larger than those fired by the more modern looking weapons..
The ONLY functional difference between the 1907 and a controversial and much feared AR15 is the modern black plastic stock.

The semi auto, so-called "assault rifle" is 110 years old. It isnt new in any way.
The semi auto rifle was not a weapon of war. The government MADE IT a weapon of war 40 years after civilians had them.
The semi-auto can be safely owned by civilians. The proof is that literally 3 generations of adults owned and used them responsibly and no one ever even noticed.
Want to fix the horror of mass shootings? Fix the things that have changed in society for the worse in the last 50 years."

As I pointed out earlier, after WWII millions of semi automatic M1 Carbines were sold to the American public with 15 and 30 round magazines. You could buy them from catalogs and gun magazine ads and have them shipped directly to your home by the US Postal Service. Using all the illogic in this thread there should have been hundreds of shootings using the Model 1907 and M1 Carbine. What changed? Society and moral values have changed and not for the good. So easy to blame an inanimate object than to work on correcting the real problem. Gun bans, mental pablum for simple minds.

Untrue, although this took more than just a few seconds to check. This story is the #1 story on the entire first page of a google search. Digging just one layer deeper, I found that the AR-15 has a thing called a direct gas impingement used in the cycling and piston and bolt and some other mechanics that I don't even try to understand and don't care about.

What's interesting about it isn't what it is. It's that it was patented in the 1956. It didn't exist for the 50 years of the Winchester 1907's manufacture, until 4 years before the Winchester 1907 was retired. And - it was introduced by Colt, not Winchester.

So no, they're not exactly the same. They don't look the same, they didn't come with the same components, didn't fire the same ammo, didn't have the same weight, didn't have the same thrust, didn't have the same method of (whatever it is that bolts and pistons do).

The only thing they had in common is that they're both semi-automatic rifles.

[Scbang]

Here is an interesting bit of firearm history a friend sent me:

What changed? Society and moral values have changed and not for the good. So easy to blame an inanimate object than to work on correcting the real problem. Gun bans, mental pablum for simple minds.

Very good points. As you have mentioned what changed? The society, culture and almost everything changed since 1907. We are not the same people whom we can trust with 1907 or M1 Carbine. Can we change us back to 1907? Maybe not. Then we should reconsider whether the current society can be trusted with 1907s and M1 Carbines safely..

SAD

[Taltarzac725]

Charles Whitman in the U of Texas tower and his actions changed things a lot. University of Texas tower shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting)

Here is an interesting bit of firearm history a friend sent me:

"A hundred and twelve years ago, in 1907...our great grandparents were first able to the semi-auto Winchester Model 1907.
This is a gun they could buy from a Sears catalogue and have delivered via US Post. It was/ is a semi-automatic, high powered centerfire rifle, with detachable, high capacity magazine.
About 400,000 semi-automatic rifles were produced before WW2. Civilians had hundreds of thousands of these for 40 years, while US soldiers were still being issued old fashioned bolt action rifles.
The 1907 fired just as fast as an AR15 or AK47 and the bullet (.351 Winchester) was actually larger than those fired by the more modern looking weapons..
The ONLY functional difference between the 1907 and a controversial and much feared AR15 is the modern black plastic stock.

The semi auto, so-called "assault rifle" is 110 years old. It isnt new in any way.
The semi auto rifle was not a weapon of war. The government MADE IT a weapon of war 40 years after civilians had them.
The semi-auto can be safely owned by civilians. The proof is that literally 3 generations of adults owned and used them responsibly and no one ever even noticed.
Want to fix the horror of mass shootings? Fix the things that have changed in society for the worse in the last 50 years."

As I pointed out earlier, after WWII millions of semi automatic M1 Carbines were sold to the American public with 15 and 30 round magazines. You could buy them from catalogs and gun magazine ads and have them shipped directly to your home by the US Postal Service. Using all the illogic in this thread there should have been hundreds of shootings using the Model 1907 and M1 Carbine. What changed? Society and moral values have changed and not for the good. So easy to blame an inanimate object than to work on correcting the real problem. Gun bans, mental pablum for simple minds.

[Jack58033]

The Japanese play violent video games but it does not correlate to gun violence. They make it hard to get guns.They don't have a fraction of the guns we have.

[jdulej]

Charles Whitman in the U of Texas tower and his actions changed things a lot. University of Texas tower shooting - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting)

///

[jdulej]

Here is an interesting bit of firearm history a friend sent me:

"A hundred and twelve years ago, in 1907...our great grandparents were first able to the semi-auto Winchester Model 1907.
This is a gun they could buy from a Sears catalogue and have delivered via US Post. It was/ is a semi-automatic, high powered centerfire rifle, with detachable, high capacity magazine.
About 400,000 semi-automatic rifles were produced before WW2. Civilians had hundreds of thousands of these for 40 years, while US soldiers were still being issued old fashioned bolt action rifles.
The 1907 fired just as fast as an AR15 or AK47 and the bullet (.351 Winchester) was actually larger than those fired by the more modern looking weapons..
The ONLY functional difference between the 1907 and a controversial and much feared AR15 is the modern black plastic stock.

The semi auto, so-called "assault rifle" is 110 years old. It isnt new in any way.
The semi auto rifle was not a weapon of war. The government MADE IT a weapon of war 40 years after civilians had them.
The semi-auto can be safely owned by civilians. The proof is that literally 3 generations of adults owned and used them responsibly and no one ever even noticed.
Want to fix the horror of mass shootings? Fix the things that have changed in society for the worse in the last 50 years."

As I pointed out earlier, after WWII millions of semi automatic M1 Carbines were sold to the American public with 15 and 30 round magazines. You could buy them from catalogs and gun magazine ads and have them shipped directly to your home by the US Postal Service. Using all the illogic in this thread there should have been hundreds of shootings using the Model 1907 and M1 Carbine. What changed? Society and moral values have changed and not for the good. So easy to blame an inanimate object than to work on correcting the real problem. Gun bans, mental pablum for simple minds.

You note one of many examples of how humans find a way to take an object and subvert it to satisfy a desire the object was never intended for. Two I can think of in my half awake state are 1) Tylenol. The original was much more effective than today's version, but also could easily be broken down to provide a key ingredient for Speed. 2) Cocaine. 100+ years ago, this was in every households' medicine cabinet until society decided it shouldn't be.
In the above two cases, and all the others I have thought about, the "solution" has been to ban or change the object, NOT to expect people to stop subverting the object to fit their needs. This will happen to the semi auto as well eventually. The generation that is so hung up on the 2nd amendment in all its various interpretations is dying out, and the younger folks have better things to do with their time.
People who think they need to closet full of guns to protect them for "The Man" don't realize that they already lost that battle - society has already been molded to fit the fascist model - the 1 or 2% own and control everything, the middle 70% do all the work and get thrown a bone from time to time (that's us), and the rest get blamed for everything and keep the middle group dumb and happy.
All we can do until the day comes when this model falls apart (they all do eventually) is work around the edges to enjoy life.

[Normal]

These shooters almost always seem to go for the militaristic look. The AR look seems to glorify their position before they do their dastardly deed and then become suicidal. Really, this shooter could have done a lot more damage with a shotgun and ammo tubes. Why not just remove the look and sell the semi automatic rifle with a hunting rifle style and look? Get rid of the MR. GI Joe appearance and glory.

[jimjamuser]

Crime should have been rampant during the Great Depression but from what I've read about that period of economic catastrophe, there wasn't a drastic rise in crime.
Actually, crime and murders did increase during the Great Depression - it spawned many gang murders in the big cities and often involved the Mafia. Many factors were different in 1929 than today obviously. The US population was 123 million people then. Most people were farmers and the Midwest became a "dust bowl" where much of the rich topsoil blew away. The average farmer would own a shotgun or a bolt action rifle for deer hunting. Only career criminal mafia types would possess semi-auto rifles or automatic "machine guns". In 1929 the ratio of guns per person was probably less than .25 - today it is 1.2 guns per person in the US. In 1929 there was no NRA or gun manufacturer's lobby trying desperately (for high profits) to convince every young male that they NEEDED a semi-auto, low recoil, MAN-killing weapon with a 30 round banana mag. Yes, the "times they are a-changing"!

[dewilson58]

In 1929 the ratio of guns per person was probably less than .25 - today it is 1.2 guns per person in the US. Yes, the "times they are a-changing"!

In 1929, cars per person was .22 cars, today it's 1.8 cars.

[Number 10 GI]

Untrue, although this took more than just a few seconds to check. This story is the #1 story on the entire first page of a google search. Digging just one layer deeper, I found that the AR-15 has a thing called a direct gas impingement used in the cycling and piston and bolt and some other mechanics that I don't even try to understand and don't care about.

What's interesting about it isn't what it is. It's that it was patented in the 1956. It didn't exist for the 50 years of the Winchester 1907's manufacture, until 4 years before the Winchester 1907 was retired. And - it was introduced by Colt, not Winchester.

So no, they're not exactly the same. They don't look the same, they didn't come with the same components, didn't fire the same ammo, didn't have the same weight, didn't have the same thrust, didn't have the same method of (whatever it is that bolts and pistons do).

The only thing they had in common is that they're both semi-automatic rifles.

It is quite obvious you have absolutely no knowledge of firearms, and as you stated you really don't care about gaining the knowledge. A semi auto rifle is a semi auto rife no matter what is looks like, they still fire a single round with each pull of the trigger. Looks mean nothing when it comes to lethality or function.
The Model 1907 round has a heavier hitting bullet that is meant for large game animals where as the 5.56 x 45 MM round of the AR15 is considered the absolute minimum caliber for deer. Some states don't allow the use of the AR15 round for hunting large game.
Your point about when the AR was patented is irrelevant, what does that have to do with when the Model 1907 was introduced?
I never stated that the AR15 was made by Winchester. ArmaLite sold the rights to the design of the AR15 to Colt.

[jimjamuser]

The long bow was a devastating weapon used by the English army. Armies of those times had huge wooden hammers called War Hammers that crushed skulls and shattered bones. The Mace, a large iron ball with spikes that was attached to a chain and swung by the soldier penetrating medieval armor crushing skulls and shattered bones. All kinds of knives and swords have been used as a weapon of war.

Nearly every firearm that has been made was a weapon of war so claiming the AR 15 is a weapon of war doesn't make it any different that say an M1 Carbine. In case you don't know, the M1 Carbine was a semi automatic rifle and the M2 Carbine was full automatic. The M1 and M2 carbines originally came with 15 round magazines and later in the war, 30 round magazines Carbines were sold in the millions as surplus after the war and how in many "mass shootings" have you ever heard about them being used?

You totally ignore the fact that kings and dictators over the centuries have banned the ownership of weapons by their subjects. They didn't want anybody challenging their power. If you don't think our government would never turn into a dictatorship you are totally naive when it comes to human nature and the desire for power.
Actually, I think that it is now about 50 / 50 whether from 2024 on the US will BECOME a dictatorship. And I think that is the likely reason why the last 2 years have shown such a big increase in GUN OWNERSHIP - from 300 million to 400 million. So, I agree about that. And I agree that the Viet Cong rebels fought back with lower-tech battlefield equipment, mostly GUNS. And they used a BOLT-ACTION Mosin-Nagant rifle for sniper use.
..........So, IF (a BIG if) the US has a Dictatorship around 2026, then the rebels should be stacking up on long-range
sniper-type BOLT-ACTION rifles rather than the short-range military-style semi-autos.
..........Anyway, the easiest, least bloody, and best way to prevent a dictatorship is by votes, not bullets.

[Number 10 GI]

..........Anyway, the easiest, least bloody, and best way to prevent a dictatorship is by votes, not bullets.

That is exactly how Hitler came to power, voted into office by the citizens of Germany. And, once he became the Fuhrer, he enacted gun control laws that removed guns from the hands of the German people and the Jews. We all know what happened to the Jews.

[MartinSE]

That is exactly how Hitler came to power, voted into office by the citizens of Germany. And, once he became the Fuhrer, he enacted gun control laws that removed guns from the hands of the German people and the Jews. We all know what happened to the Jews.

Very good advice, we should all remember if a nationalist authoritarian runs for President.

[Taltarzac725]

Actually, I think that it is now about 50 / 50 whether from 2024 on the US will BECOME a dictatorship. And I think that is the likely reason why the last 2 years have shown such a big increase in GUN OWNERSHIP - from 300 million to 400 million. So, I agree about that. And I agree that the Viet Cong rebels fought back with lower-tech battlefield equipment, mostly GUNS. And they used a BOLT-ACTION Mosin-Nagant rifle for sniper use.
..........So, IF (a BIG if) the US has a Dictatorship around 2026, then the rebels should be stacking up on long-range
sniper-type BOLT-ACTION rifles rather than the short-range military-style semi-autos.
..........Anyway, the easiest, least bloody, and best way to prevent a dictatorship is by votes, not bullets.

List of Roman emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors)

Our Founding Fathers were familiar with Greek and Roman history and could see that if a rotten emperor controlled the military he or she could stay in power but as soon as they lost that connection the military put in a new leader. It happened multiple times in some years.

Year of the Four Emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors)

Year of the Five Emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Five_Emperors)

Barracks emperor - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_emperor)

Our military leaders seem very careful not to get the Army, Navy, etc. involved in politics such as it would lead to so many civil wars like in Rome and sometimes in Ancient Greece.

[jimjamuser]

Here is an interesting bit of firearm history a friend sent me:

"A hundred and twelve years ago, in 1907...our great grandparents were first able to the semi-auto Winchester Model 1907.
This is a gun they could buy from a Sears catalogue and have delivered via US Post. It was/ is a semi-automatic, high powered centerfire rifle, with detachable, high capacity magazine.
About 400,000 semi-automatic rifles were produced before WW2. Civilians had hundreds of thousands of these for 40 years, while US soldiers were still being issued old fashioned bolt action rifles.
The 1907 fired just as fast as an AR15 or AK47 and the bullet (.351 Winchester) was actually larger than those fired by the more modern looking weapons..
The ONLY functional difference between the 1907 and a controversial and much feared AR15 is the modern black plastic stock.

The semi auto, so-called "assault rifle" is 110 years old. It isnt new in any way.
The semi auto rifle was not a weapon of war. The government MADE IT a weapon of war 40 years after civilians had them.
The semi-auto can be safely owned by civilians. The proof is that literally 3 generations of adults owned and used them responsibly and no one ever even noticed.
Want to fix the horror of mass shootings? Fix the things that have changed in society for the worse in the last 50 years."

As I pointed out earlier, after WWII millions of semi automatic M1 Carbines were sold to the American public with 15 and 30 round magazines. You could buy them from catalogs and gun magazine ads and have them shipped directly to your home by the US Postal Service. Using all the illogic in this thread there should have been hundreds of shootings using the Model 1907 and M1 Carbine. What changed? Society and moral values have changed and not for the good. So easy to blame an inanimate object than to work on correcting the real problem. Gun bans, mental pablum for simple minds.
It is true that FUNCTUALLY the Winchester 1907 is similar to the AR 15 in that they are both semi-auto rifles. But, there are significant differences. The 1907 would be longer than an AR-15 clone and therefore harder to hide under a trench coat. The cartridge of the 1907 would produce MUCH more recoil than the 223 used in an AR-15. This low-recoil feature of the 223 cartridge allows AR-15 shooters to become more proficient killers because they don't have to worry about the affects of high recoil - like barrel rise and shooter flinching. Also, the 223 cartridge is smaller and lighter than the 351 caliber of the 1907 so a mass murder can carry more rounds. And the high velocity of the 223 causes the bullet to practically explode in human flesh as compared with the .351 low velocity round. So, there ARE significant differences.
.........And society has changed so much since we grew up in the 1950s that SOMETHING must be done about the MASS-MURDER problem. The EASIEST solution is to do what Australia and New Zealand did - eliminate semi-auto rifles from CIVILIAN hands.

[jimjamuser]

Untrue, although this took more than just a few seconds to check. This story is the #1 story on the entire first page of a google search. Digging just one layer deeper, I found that the AR-15 has a thing called a direct gas impingement used in the cycling and piston and bolt and some other mechanics that I don't even try to understand and don't care about.

What's interesting about it isn't what it is. It's that it was patented in the 1956. It didn't exist for the 50 years of the Winchester 1907's manufacture, until 4 years before the Winchester 1907 was retired. And - it was introduced by Colt, not Winchester.

So no, they're not exactly the same. They don't look the same, they didn't come with the same components, didn't fire the same ammo, didn't have the same weight, didn't have the same thrust, didn't have the same method of (whatever it is that bolts and pistons do).

The only thing they had in common is that they're both semi-automatic rifles.
Good post!

[jimjamuser]

The Japanese play violent video games but it does not correlate to gun violence. They make it hard to get guns.They don't have a fraction of the guns we have.
Right, the problem is the easy availability of MAN-killing GUNS in the US. Other countries have solved this problem. The US need-NOT be a country where children FEAR to go to school. And adults fear going to church or to get groceries!

[jimjamuser]

You note one of many examples of how humans find a way to take an object and subvert it to satisfy a desire the object was never intended for. Two I can think of in my half awake state are 1) Tylenol. The original was much more effective than today's version, but also could easily be broken down to provide a key ingredient for Speed. 2) Cocaine. 100+ years ago, this was in every households' medicine cabinet until society decided it shouldn't be.
In the above two cases, and all the others I have thought about, the "solution" has been to ban or change the object, NOT to expect people to stop subverting the object to fit their needs. This will happen to the semi auto as well eventually. The generation that is so hung up on the 2nd amendment in all its various interpretations is dying out, and the younger folks have better things to do with their time.
People who think they need to closet full of guns to protect them for "The Man" don't realize that they already lost that battle - society has already been molded to fit the fascist model - the 1 or 2% own and control everything, the middle 70% do all the work and get thrown a bone from time to time (that's us), and the rest get blamed for everything and keep the middle group dumb and happy.
All we can do until the day comes when this model falls apart (they all do eventually) is work around the edges to enjoy life.
That post and especially the last paragraph were very inciteful. Kudos. And to add just a minor point I believe that when Coca-Cola was 1st bottled, it contained cocaine. Maybe that's why there were fewer mass murders then??????

[Lindsyburnsy]

You mean the culture of not owning guns?

[MartinSE]

That post and especially the last paragraph was very inciteful. Kudos. And to add just a minor point I believe that when Coca-Cola was 1st bottled, it contained cocaine. Maybe that's why there were fewer mass murders then??????

Great idea, lets legalize cocaine, and put it in the water supply - boost productivity too.

(j/k) It's a joke son, just a joke.

[jimjamuser]

That is exactly how Hitler came to power, voted into office by the citizens of Germany. And, once he became the Fuhrer, he enacted gun control laws that removed guns from the hands of the German people and the Jews. We all know what happened to the Jews.
Yes, agreed. How people vote determines very important directions taken by people and their countries. You can vote for a dictator or you can vote against them and keep them out of power. My main point is that SOMETHING is brewing up in the US right now. The BIG INCREASE in US GUN OWNERSHIP in the last 2 years has me WORRIED. There is NOT a big increase in deer hunters or target shooters - there is SOMETHING else going on here. And I worry that it is DARK and SINISTER!
..........At the January 6th attempted OVERTHROW of the US government, you could see many flags. One of the most prominent flags had an image of a military-style AR-15-looking rifle. This has become the defacto SYMBOL of the dark proud-boy-type anarchy-oriented sick insurrectionists. Jan 6th PORTENDS a situation where citizens will have to choose between having a DEMOCRACY and NOT a dictatorship - OR having a strict interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and LOVING the proud-boy-anarchist and their SYMBOL of HATE and children's blood.......the AR killing machine.
..........you decide!

[jimjamuser]

List of Roman emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors)

Our Founding Fathers were familiar with Greek and Roman history and could see that if a rotten emperor controlled the military he or she could stay in power but as soon as they lost that connection the military put in a new leader. It happened multiple times in some years.

Year of the Four Emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors)

Year of the Five Emperors - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Five_Emperors)

Barracks emperor - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_emperor)

Our military leaders seem very careful not to get the Army, Navy, etc. involved in politics such as it would lead to so many civil wars like in Rome and sometimes in Ancient Greece.
And I worry about our current all-volunteer army. I would prefer that 20% of the military be drafted. I think that would give more stability to the military and lessen the chance of a US military takeover of government.

[drducat]

Yes, agreed. How people vote determines very important directions taken by people and their countries. You can vote for a dictator or you can vote against them and keep them out of power. My main point is that SOMETHING is brewing up in the US right now. The BIG INCREASE in US GUN OWNERSHIP in the last 2 years has me WORRIED. There is NOT a big increase in deer hunters or target shooters - there is SOMETHING else going on here. And I worry that it is DARK and SINISTER!
..........At the January 6th attempted OVERTHROW of the US government, you could see many flags. One of the most prominent flags had an image of a military-style AR-15-looking rifle. This has become the defacto SYMBOL of the dark proud-boy-type anarchy-oriented sick insurrectionists. Jan 6th PORTENDS a situation where citizens will have to choose between having a DEMOCRACY and NOT a dictatorship - OR having a strict interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and LOVING the proud-boy-anarchist and their SYMBOL of HATE and children's blood.......the AR killing machine.
..........you decide!

Agree!

Here are the 14 lessons I’ve learned from this tragedy. I’m certain tens of millions of conservative patriots see it the exact same way. Wanna bet?

1. Guns aren’t the problem. “Gun Free Zones” are the problem. They are killing fields. They are an open invitation for mentally-deranged criminals and criminally insane madmen to walk in and start shooting. “Gun Free Zone” signs are like a blinking neon sign in Vegas screaming, “Come on in and kill us. We are helpless, defenseless and weak.”

2. Guns didn’t cause this tragedy. But a good guy with a gun sure ended it. An armed border agent killed the bad guy, thereby saving lives. That should be the headline.

3. We need more good guys (and gals) with guns to stop bad guys. Every school needs armed security. There should be only a single point of entry to every school- and a guard must always protect that entrance. All other doors to the school need to be locked and secured.

4. Backing up the armed security at every school should be teachers and/or administrators with guns and professional gun training.

5. How can we afford all this? I’ve argued from day one it was a disastrous decision and tragic mistake to give another $40 billion to Ukraine. We need to worry about America. We could have used that $40 billion here at home. Half of it ($20 billion) should have been used to pay for armed security at every school in America.

6. If we really want to protect children, secure the border. The other half of the Ukraine funding ($20 billion more) should have been used to build and secure the wall on our Southern border. If we’re angry and shocked as a nation about 19 innocent young children dying in that school shooting, shouldn’t we be even more concerned with tens of thousands of American kids dying each year from drug overdoses- with drugs brought through our porous open border. Everything that comes over that border is a threat to America’s children- drugs, human traffickers, child sex traffickers and tons of violent criminals, gang bangers and MS-13 murderers. Why didn’t we use that Ukraine money to save thousands of children’s lives by securing the border?

7. Gun control is never the answer. Gun control is a massive failure. There are far more shootings, violent crimes and murders in big cities with strict gun control than anywhere else. If strict gun control works, why are the streets of cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New York and Los Angeles such killing fields? The answer is simple: strict gun control never stops criminals. It just leaves the good people defenseless.

8. New gun laws will do nothing to stop crime or mass murders. Why don’t we enforce laws already on the books against violent criminals? Crimes are almost always committed by repeat offenders that District Attorneys allowed back on the streets.

9. Instead of useless new laws, why don’t we make mass murder (the killing of two or more) a DEATH PENALTY crime. If convicted of mass murder, there are no appeals, the convicted mass killer is executed the next day by firing squad. End of story. That’s the way to deter more mass shootings.

10. Investigate Big Pharma for the drugs they pump into young males for depression, anger issues, ADD and mental illness. Virtually every mass killer in recent memory was on these drugs. The side effects of these drugs are suicidal and violent thoughts. Why are we drugging so many male teenagers?

11. Never mention “Defund Police” ever again. Incidents like this prove we need more police, not less.

12. But as much as I love and appreciate police, boy did they fail miserably this time. There are many questions about how the police responded to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. How could they stand around for an hour while kids were being slaughtered? Police announced they waited so long because they were “afraid to get shot.” Really? If police are afraid to get shot, they should be instantly terminated. That’s their job- to risk their life to protect civilians. And while they refused to enter the school to confront the shooter, they handcuffed, tasered
and pepper sprayed parents who begged them to go in? So, please no more “defund police,” but let’s re-think how we’re hiring and training police. We need heroic macho warriors. Stop trying to make them into politically-correct pansies, poets and social workers.

13. This mass shooting and the poor police response only makes American patriots even more certain it’s up to us to defend ourselves and save our families. We love the police, but we can never count on them. “If it is to be, it is up to me.” I’ll bet more guns will be bought in the coming months by Americans than ever before in history.

14. One final point. Actually, it’s a pledge. Stop trying to take our guns. This isn’t Australia or New Zealand. This is America. You’re never taking our guns. As in never, never, never, EVER. You’ll only take our guns from our cold dead hands. So, drop your demands. You’re wasting your time. You may not know it yet, but you’ve lost the battle.

I repeat- we’re NEVER giving up our guns.


This article looks about right!

[MartinSE]

Agree!

Here are the 14 lessons I’ve learned from this tragedy. I’m certain tens of millions of conservative patriots see it the exact same way. Wanna bet?

1. Guns aren’t the problem. “Gun Free Zones” are the problem. They are killing fields. They are an open invitation for mentally-deranged criminals and criminally insane madmen to walk in and start shooting. “Gun Free Zone” signs are like a blinking neon sign in Vegas screaming, “Come on in and kill us. We are helpless, defenseless and weak.”

2. Guns didn’t cause this tragedy. But a good guy with a gun sure ended it. An armed border agent killed the bad guy, thereby saving lives. That should be the headline.

3. We need more good guys (and gals) with guns to stop bad guys. Every school needs armed security. There should be only a single point of entry to every school- and a guard must always protect that entrance. All other doors to the school need to be locked and secured.

4. Backing up the armed security at every school should be teachers and/or administrators with guns and professional gun training.

5. How can we afford all this? I’ve argued from day one it was a disastrous decision and tragic mistake to give another $40 billion to Ukraine. We need to worry about America. We could have used that $40 billion here at home. Half of it ($20 billion) should have been used to pay for armed security at every school in America.

6. If we really want to protect children, secure the border. The other half of the Ukraine funding ($20 billion more) should have been used to build and secure the wall on our Southern border. If we’re angry and shocked as a nation about 19 innocent young children dying in that school shooting, shouldn’t we be even more concerned with tens of thousands of American kids dying each year from drug overdoses- with drugs brought through our porous open border. Everything that comes over that border is a threat to America’s children- drugs, human traffickers, child sex traffickers and tons of violent criminals, gang bangers and MS-13 murderers. Why didn’t we use that Ukraine money to save thousands of children’s lives by securing the border?

7. Gun control is never the answer. Gun control is a massive failure. There are far more shootings, violent crimes and murders in big cities with strict gun control than anywhere else. If strict gun control works, why are the streets of cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New York and Los Angeles such killing fields? The answer is simple: strict gun control never stops criminals. It just leaves the good people defenseless.

8. New gun laws will do nothing to stop crime or mass murders. Why don’t we enforce laws already on the books against violent criminals? Crimes are almost always committed by repeat offenders that District Attorneys allowed back on the streets.

9. Instead of useless new laws, why don’t we make mass murder (the killing of two or more) a DEATH PENALTY crime. If convicted of mass murder, there are no appeals, the convicted mass killer is executed the next day by firing squad. End of story. That’s the way to deter more mass shootings.

10. Investigate Big Pharma for the drugs they pump into young males for depression, anger issues, ADD and mental illness. Virtually every mass killer in recent memory was on these drugs. The side effects of these drugs are suicidal and violent thoughts. Why are we drugging so many male teenagers?

11. Never mention “Defund Police” ever again. Incidents like this prove we need more police, not less.

12. But as much as I love and appreciate police, boy did they fail miserably this time. There are many questions about how the police responded to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. How could they stand around for an hour while kids were being slaughtered? Police announced they waited so long because they were “afraid to get shot.” Really? If police are afraid to get shot, they should be instantly terminated. That’s their job- to risk their life to protect civilians. And while they refused to enter the school to confront the shooter, they handcuffed, tasered
and pepper sprayed parents who begged them to go in? So, please no more “defund police,” but let’s re-think how we’re hiring and training police. We need heroic macho warriors. Stop trying to make them into politically-correct pansies, poets and social workers.

13. This mass shooting and the poor police response only makes American patriots even more certain it’s up to us to defend ourselves and save our families. We love the police, but we can never count on them. “If it is to be, it is up to me.” I’ll bet more guns will be bought in the coming months by Americans than ever before in history.

14. One final point. Actually, it’s a pledge. Stop trying to take our guns. This isn’t Australia or New Zealand. This is America. You’re never taking our guns. As in never, never, never, EVER. You’ll only take our guns from our cold dead hands. So, drop your demands. You’re wasting your time. You may not know it yet, but you’ve lost the battle.

I repeat- we’re NEVER giving up our guns.


This article looks about right!

I respectfully disagree with almost everything you said.

And of them the arming teachers is the one I disagree with most. That is a recipe for disaster in so many ways. Including a mass exodus of teachers, and teachers killing students as a teacher with NO active shooter confrontation experience attempts to stop an adrenaline enraged teenager wielding 2 semi-automatics , by shooting them.

And if good-guys with a gun are the solution, why does the NRA require guns carried by the attendee's? Oh, right that mean old stupid Secret Service wont let them make the meeting safe. Yeah, right that makes sense. The secret service is the bad guy there.

And "defund the police" is maybe the worst comment a DEM ever made. It is a mischaracterization of what was meant. And most people KNOW it, and yes continue to repeat it. Defund the Police was a stupid saying for a great idea. Let police do police work, and stop sending them on domestic violence, mentally ill issue, parking tickets, speeding tickets and all the others BS they are required to do, and are funded to do. They should be focusing on police work, stopping and catching criminals. They should be focusing on stopping shooters. They should NOT be focused on giving out parking tickets and tickets for changing lanes without using your turn signal. That is what was meant - let police do police work, and move some of the funds paying for that work into funding meter-maids and traffic enforcement. Send people that are trained to handle confrontations with the mentally ill, and on and on.

But instead DEFUND THE POLICE one of the more stupid things a DEM ever said because the rallying cry of the opposition. So , n ow instead of making useful changes we can all sit around and argue every time someone bring it up again - out of context.

[Normal]

You know, the haphazard raising of our youth hasn’t helped the situation much. Columbine wasn’t the first shooting, but it was the first in a very long time. Since 1999, we have had several copy the idea. Klebold and Harris didn’t even use AR 15s because they weren’t cool back then. However, they did mimic their favorite shoot ‘em up game (Doom) trench coats and all.

If American kids keep getting that garbage pumped through their minds, things will likely get worse. Raising our kids with television and video games that glorify killing may not be the answer and could by chance, contribute to our problems.

[MartinSE]

You know, the haphazard raising of our youth hasn’t helped the situation much. Columbine wasn’t the first shooting, but it was the first in a very long time. Since 1999, we have had several copy the idea. Klebold and Harris didn’t even use AR 15s because they wear cool back then. However, they did mimic their favorite shoot ‘em up game (Doom” trench coats and all.

If American kids keep getting that garbage pumped through their minds, things will likely get worse. Raising our kids with television and video games that glorify killing may not be the answer and could by chance, contribute to our problems.

Well, right idea, but, in my humble opinion, wrong cause.

The rest of the world also watches TV and Movies and plays silent video games. No other country has had one 20 school shootings this year.

But, it is our society, our culture. I agree. Guns are not the problem, they are a symptom and an easy solution for those looking to express their anger, frustration and to get some token of notoriety.

Some think the breakdown in American Society is a result of the Bible being taken out of "our lives". I disagree. I think it is that until around the 1970's single wage earners could make living wage to support their family. Today that is pretty much gone. In most families both parents (or the one parent) have to work. Often far more than 40 hours a week just to get by, no chance of "getting ahead". Prior to the 70's most parents focused on making a better life for their children - that included good work ethic example, some that loved them around all day to give comfort when they needed it, and an optimism that some day they kids would have better live than they did.

For MOST families today, that is not the dream, the dream is now, to be able to buy food and medication. To be able to pay the rent, not have the electricity turned off. And HOPE to god they don't get called in to the school to get the kid and take them home, because that is lost time at work and the chance they won't make it to next pay day - again.

Then add in all the anger and hate spewed by media and people look for someone to blame and which ever side the find closest to their beliefs that latch onto and begin hating the other side.

We USED to be Americans. Now we are one of two sides and it is out patriotic duty (we are told 24 hours a day) to HATE the other side.

That I believe to be the root cause. The loss of hope for a better future.

[Topspinmo]

They had a huge jungle and were very adept at guerrilla warfare. Guerrilla warfare - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare)

History of guerrilla warfare - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_guerrilla_warfare)

And the US was restricted above demilitarized zone and surrounding counties. We had limited war and VC didn’t. Our strategy was loser from the beginning and IMO we should NEVER had our soldiers step one foot VN ground. IMO same with Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Topspinmo]

Well, right idea, but, in my humble opinion, wrong cause.

The rest of the world also watches TV and Movies and plays silent video games. No other country has had one 20 school shootings this year.

But, it is our society, our culture. I agree. Guns are not the problem, they are a symptom and an easy solution for those looking to express their anger, frustration and to get some token of notoriety.

Some think the breakdown in American Society is a result of the Bible being taken out of "our lives". I disagree. I think it is that until around the 1970's single wage earners could make living wage to support their family. Today that is pretty much gone. In most families both parents (or the one parent) have to work. Often far more than 40 hours a week just to get by, no chance of "getting ahead". Prior to the 70's most parents focused on making a better life for their children - that included good work ethic example, some that loved them around all day to give comfort when they needed it, and an optimism that some day they kids would have better live than they did.

For MOST families today, that is not the dream, the dream is now, to be able to buy food and medication. To be able to pay the rent, not have the electricity turned off. And HOPE to god they don't get called in to the school to get the kid and take them home, because that is lost time at work and the chance they won't make it to next pay day - again.

Then add in all the anger and hate spewed by media and people look for someone to blame and which ever side the find closest to their beliefs that latch onto and begin hating the other side.

We USED to be Americans. Now we are one of two sides and it is out patriotic duty (we are told 24 hours a day) to HATE the other side.

That I believe to be the root cause. The loss of hope for a better future.

Mostly agree.

You can say rest of world, but really don’t know, and they don’t have freedom or population of USA. So like my opinion it’s just you’re opinion.

IMO What you get with two party system, us or them, with that system it will never change when power and money involved.

I am for reasonable gun control/magazine control. IMO no high powered rifle (centerfire) should hold more than 4 rounds and no handgun (centerfire) more than 6 rounds.

Actually I don’t see need for anything to hold more than 6 rounds. Including my PCP air rifle. But, that’s my opinion.

[jimjamuser]

Agree!

Here are the 14 lessons I’ve learned from this tragedy. I’m certain tens of millions of conservative patriots see it the exact same way. Wanna bet?

1. Guns aren’t the problem. “Gun Free Zones” are the problem. They are killing fields. They are an open invitation for mentally-deranged criminals and criminally insane madmen to walk in and start shooting. “Gun Free Zone” signs are like a blinking neon sign in Vegas screaming, “Come on in and kill us. We are helpless, defenseless and weak.”

2. Guns didn’t cause this tragedy. But a good guy with a gun sure ended it. An armed border agent killed the bad guy, thereby saving lives. That should be the headline.

3. We need more good guys (and gals) with guns to stop bad guys. Every school needs armed security. There should be only a single point of entry to every school- and a guard must always protect that entrance. All other doors to the school need to be locked and secured.

4. Backing up the armed security at every school should be teachers and/or administrators with guns and professional gun training.

5. How can we afford all this? I’ve argued from day one it was a disastrous decision and tragic mistake to give another $40 billion to Ukraine. We need to worry about America. We could have used that $40 billion here at home. Half of it ($20 billion) should have been used to pay for armed security at every school in America.

6. If we really want to protect children, secure the border. The other half of the Ukraine funding ($20 billion more) should have been used to build and secure the wall on our Southern border. If we’re angry and shocked as a nation about 19 innocent young children dying in that school shooting, shouldn’t we be even more concerned with tens of thousands of American kids dying each year from drug overdoses- with drugs brought through our porous open border. Everything that comes over that border is a threat to America’s children- drugs, human traffickers, child sex traffickers and tons of violent criminals, gang bangers and MS-13 murderers. Why didn’t we use that Ukraine money to save thousands of children’s lives by securing the border?

7. Gun control is never the answer. Gun control is a massive failure. There are far more shootings, violent crimes and murders in big cities with strict gun control than anywhere else. If strict gun control works, why are the streets of cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New York and Los Angeles such killing fields? The answer is simple: strict gun control never stops criminals. It just leaves the good people defenseless.

8. New gun laws will do nothing to stop crime or mass murders. Why don’t we enforce laws already on the books against violent criminals? Crimes are almost always committed by repeat offenders that District Attorneys allowed back on the streets.

9. Instead of useless new laws, why don’t we make mass murder (the killing of two or more) a DEATH PENALTY crime. If convicted of mass murder, there are no appeals, the convicted mass killer is executed the next day by firing squad. End of story. That’s the way to deter more mass shootings.

10. Investigate Big Pharma for the drugs they pump into young males for depression, anger issues, ADD and mental illness. Virtually every mass killer in recent memory was on these drugs. The side effects of these drugs are suicidal and violent thoughts. Why are we drugging so many male teenagers?

11. Never mention “Defund Police” ever again. Incidents like this prove we need more police, not less.

12. But as much as I love and appreciate police, boy did they fail miserably this time. There are many questions about how the police responded to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. How could they stand around for an hour while kids were being slaughtered? Police announced they waited so long because they were “afraid to get shot.” Really? If police are afraid to get shot, they should be instantly terminated. That’s their job- to risk their life to protect civilians. And while they refused to enter the school to confront the shooter, they handcuffed, tasered
and pepper sprayed parents who begged them to go in? So, please no more “defund police,” but let’s re-think how we’re hiring and training police. We need heroic macho warriors. Stop trying to make them into politically-correct pansies, poets and social workers.

13. This mass shooting and the poor police response only makes American patriots even more certain it’s up to us to defend ourselves and save our families. We love the police, but we can never count on them. “If it is to be, it is up to me.” I’ll bet more guns will be bought in the coming months by Americans than ever before in history.

14. One final point. Actually, it’s a pledge. Stop trying to take our guns. This isn’t Australia or New Zealand. This is America. You’re never taking our guns. As in never, never, never, EVER. You’ll only take our guns from our cold dead hands. So, drop your demands. You’re wasting your time. You may not know it yet, but you’ve lost the battle.

I repeat- we’re NEVER giving up our guns.


This article looks about right!
I think that I will put this post into the "undecided" column.

[jimjamuser]

I respectfully disagree with almost everything you said.

And of them the arming teachers is the one I disagree with most. That is a recipe for disaster in so many ways. Including a mass exodus of teachers, and teachers killing students as a teacher with NO active shooter confrontation experience attempts to stop an adrenaline enraged teenager wielding 2 semi-automatics , by shooting them.

And if good-guys with a gun are the solution, why does the NRA require guns carried by the attendee's? Oh, right that mean old stupid Secret Service wont let them make the meeting safe. Yeah, right that makes sense. The secret service is the bad guy there.

And "defund the police" is maybe the worst comment a DEM ever made. It is a mischaracterization of what was meant. And most people KNOW it, and yes continue to repeat it. Defund the Police was a stupid saying for a great idea. Let police do police work, and stop sending them on domestic violence, mentally ill issue, parking tickets, speeding tickets and all the others BS they are required to do, and are funded to do. They should be focusing on police work, stopping and catching criminals. They should be focusing on stopping shooters. They should NOT be focused on giving out parking tickets and tickets for changing lanes without using your turn signal. That is what was meant - let police do police work, and move some of the funds paying for that work into funding meter-maids and traffic enforcement. Send people that are trained to handle confrontations with the mentally ill, and on and on.

But instead DEFUND THE POLICE one of the more stupid things a DEM ever said because the rallying cry of the opposition. So , n ow instead of making useful changes we can all sit around and argue every time someone bring it up again - out of context.
And God thinks, "Himmmm maybe dinosaurs WOULD be less violent than a human being with an AR-15 ????????

[MartinSE]

And God thinks, "Himmmm maybe dinosaurs WOULD be less violent than a human being with an AR-15 ????????


Hint: I am an Atheist.

Dynosaurs were killed off by a meteor strike. Humans are going to do it to themselves.

[MDLNB]

Yes, agreed. How people vote determines very important directions taken by people and their countries. You can vote for a dictator or you can vote against them and keep them out of power. My main point is that SOMETHING is brewing up in the US right now. The BIG INCREASE in US GUN OWNERSHIP in the last 2 years has me WORRIED. There is NOT a big increase in deer hunters or target shooters - there is SOMETHING else going on here. And I worry that it is DARK and SINISTER!
..........At the January 6th attempted OVERTHROW of the US government, you could see many flags. One of the most prominent flags had an image of a military-style AR-15-looking rifle. This has become the defacto SYMBOL of the dark proud-boy-type anarchy-oriented sick insurrectionists. Jan 6th PORTENDS a situation where citizens will have to choose between having a DEMOCRACY and NOT a dictatorship - OR having a strict interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and LOVING the proud-boy-anarchist and their SYMBOL of HATE and children's blood.......the AR killing machine.
..........you decide!


:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: "overthrow?" What kind of morons would attempt to overthrow a gov without the use of firearms? Folks need to cut back on viewing some of this main stream media. Too much hysteria being encouraged.

[MDLNB]

:coolsmiley::BigApplause::thumbup::thumbup::thumbu p::thumbup::thumbup:
I agree.






Agree!

Here are the 14 lessons I’ve learned from this tragedy. I’m certain tens of millions of conservative patriots see it the exact same way. Wanna bet?

1. Guns aren’t the problem. “Gun Free Zones” are the problem. They are killing fields. They are an open invitation for mentally-deranged criminals and criminally insane madmen to walk in and start shooting. “Gun Free Zone” signs are like a blinking neon sign in Vegas screaming, “Come on in and kill us. We are helpless, defenseless and weak.”

2. Guns didn’t cause this tragedy. But a good guy with a gun sure ended it. An armed border agent killed the bad guy, thereby saving lives. That should be the headline.

3. We need more good guys (and gals) with guns to stop bad guys. Every school needs armed security. There should be only a single point of entry to every school- and a guard must always protect that entrance. All other doors to the school need to be locked and secured.

4. Backing up the armed security at every school should be teachers and/or administrators with guns and professional gun training.

5. How can we afford all this? I’ve argued from day one it was a disastrous decision and tragic mistake to give another $40 billion to Ukraine. We need to worry about America. We could have used that $40 billion here at home. Half of it ($20 billion) should have been used to pay for armed security at every school in America.

6. If we really want to protect children, secure the border. The other half of the Ukraine funding ($20 billion more) should have been used to build and secure the wall on our Southern border. If we’re angry and shocked as a nation about 19 innocent young children dying in that school shooting, shouldn’t we be even more concerned with tens of thousands of American kids dying each year from drug overdoses- with drugs brought through our porous open border. Everything that comes over that border is a threat to America’s children- drugs, human traffickers, child sex traffickers and tons of violent criminals, gang bangers and MS-13 murderers. Why didn’t we use that Ukraine money to save thousands of children’s lives by securing the border?

7. Gun control is never the answer. Gun control is a massive failure. There are far more shootings, violent crimes and murders in big cities with strict gun control than anywhere else. If strict gun control works, why are the streets of cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New York and Los Angeles such killing fields? The answer is simple: strict gun control never stops criminals. It just leaves the good people defenseless.

8. New gun laws will do nothing to stop crime or mass murders. Why don’t we enforce laws already on the books against violent criminals? Crimes are almost always committed by repeat offenders that District Attorneys allowed back on the streets.

9. Instead of useless new laws, why don’t we make mass murder (the killing of two or more) a DEATH PENALTY crime. If convicted of mass murder, there are no appeals, the convicted mass killer is executed the next day by firing squad. End of story. That’s the way to deter more mass shootings.

10. Investigate Big Pharma for the drugs they pump into young males for depression, anger issues, ADD and mental illness. Virtually every mass killer in recent memory was on these drugs. The side effects of these drugs are suicidal and violent thoughts. Why are we drugging so many male teenagers?

11. Never mention “Defund Police” ever again. Incidents like this prove we need more police, not less.

12. But as much as I love and appreciate police, boy did they fail miserably this time. There are many questions about how the police responded to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. How could they stand around for an hour while kids were being slaughtered? Police announced they waited so long because they were “afraid to get shot.” Really? If police are afraid to get shot, they should be instantly terminated. That’s their job- to risk their life to protect civilians. And while they refused to enter the school to confront the shooter, they handcuffed, tasered
and pepper sprayed parents who begged them to go in? So, please no more “defund police,” but let’s re-think how we’re hiring and training police. We need heroic macho warriors. Stop trying to make them into politically-correct pansies, poets and social workers.

13. This mass shooting and the poor police response only makes American patriots even more certain it’s up to us to defend ourselves and save our families. We love the police, but we can never count on them. “If it is to be, it is up to me.” I’ll bet more guns will be bought in the coming months by Americans than ever before in history.

14. One final point. Actually, it’s a pledge. Stop trying to take our guns. This isn’t Australia or New Zealand. This is America. You’re never taking our guns. As in never, never, never, EVER. You’ll only take our guns from our cold dead hands. So, drop your demands. You’re wasting your time. You may not know it yet, but you’ve lost the battle.

I repeat- we’re NEVER giving up our guns.


This article looks about right!

[Kenswing]

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: "overthrow?" What kind of morons would attempt to overthrow a gov without the use of firearms? Folks need to cut back on viewing some of this main stream media. Too much hysteria being encouraged.

According to our new firearms and tactics expert all you need is a sniper rifle. :1rotfl:

[Taltarzac725]

According to our new firearms and tactics expert all you need is a sniper rifle. :1rotfl:

Places like DC have a lot of snipers on patrol from what I hear. I did see a number of them on various roof tops around the White House in around May of 2015. They were in various kinds of uniforms.

[jimjamuser]

Well, right idea, but, in my humble opinion, wrong cause.

The rest of the world also watches TV and Movies and plays silent video games. No other country has had one 20 school shootings this year.

But, it is our society, our culture. I agree. Guns are not the problem, they are a symptom and an easy solution for those looking to express their anger, frustration and to get some token of notoriety.

Some think the breakdown in American Society is a result of the Bible being taken out of "our lives". I disagree. I think it is that until around the 1970's single wage earners could make living wage to support their family. Today that is pretty much gone. In most families both parents (or the one parent) have to work. Often far more than 40 hours a week just to get by, no chance of "getting ahead". Prior to the 70's most parents focused on making a better life for their children - that included good work ethic example, some that loved them around all day to give comfort when they needed it, and an optimism that some day they kids would have better live than they did.

For MOST families today, that is not the dream, the dream is now, to be able to buy food and medication. To be able to pay the rent, not have the electricity turned off. And HOPE to god they don't get called in to the school to get the kid and take them home, because that is lost time at work and the chance they won't make it to next pay day - again.

Then add in all the anger and hate spewed by media and people look for someone to blame and which ever side the find closest to their beliefs that latch onto and begin hating the other side.

We USED to be Americans. Now we are one of two sides and it is out patriotic duty (we are told 24 hours a day) to HATE the other side.

That I believe to be the root cause. The loss of hope for a better future.
I partly agree. About 1975(and on) things economically started going south in the US (and hope gradually went south). Tax breaks and tax brackets began to favor the wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle class. Recent tax changes favoring the wealthy 1% did not even throw a bone to lower-class taxpayers. After 1975 the average person ACTUALLY
lost money even if their wages stayed the same - due to loss of spending power, due to inflation. Not until about 2010 did average workers start to get small wage increases that moved them slightly ahead of inflation. And today due to Russian war aggression and Chinese Covid stupidity, the US is, likely, moving toward a DEEP recession and high inflation.
.........Before 1975 parents would always say that the NEXT generation would be better off than the last. After 1975 that could no longer be said! Today the US has the 1st world's most significant wealth disparity by far. US upward mobility is less than the UK. US health care outcomes (like birth fatalities) are ranked about 30th in the world.
........Face it folks........we are NOT the world leader that we were in the 1950s. We just remember it that way - the good old days of true US supremacy.
........Part of the cause of the US today leading the world in Mass murder IS the slow decline and today's disappearance of the middle class. And outsourcing to China to max out profits for greedy corporations was NOT very patriotic. Now we are so stupid that we can't get the parts we need from China to finish building US cars. The US allowed labor Unions to all but disappear. Funny, they seem to work in Germany, where management and the workers cooperate with each other. There are a lot of factors that have weakened the US middle class.
...........Up until recently, the US always was PROUD of its STRONG middle class.....no more. A strong middle class gives a country maximum STABILITY. The weak middle class and unresolved racial issues tear at the fabric of the nation. For further proof of instability look at the HUGE increases in US suicides and drug overdoses. The US has the highest wealth disparity in the world AND the highest, by far, amount of GUNS circulating in Civilian hands, AND WE may have the highest amount of dangerous drugs circulating in society and among young people. It seems LOGICAL that those factors would equate to more MASS MURDERS.
.........And, Oh yes, we DO lead the world, by far, in MASS MURDERS!

[jimjamuser]

Mostly agree.

You can say rest of world, but really don’t know, and they don’t have freedom or population of USA. So like my opinion it’s just you’re opinion.

IMO What you get with two party system, us or them, with that system it will never change when power and money involved.

I am for reasonable gun control/magazine control. IMO no high powered rifle (centerfire) should hold more than 4 rounds and no handgun (centerfire) more than 6 rounds.

Actually I don’t see need for anything to hold more than 6 rounds. Including my PCP air rifle. But, that’s my opinion.
I agree about the 6 rounds.

[jdulej]

I partly agree. About 1975(and on) things economically started going south in the US (and hope gradually went south). Tax breaks and tax brackets began to favor the wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle class. Recent tax changes favoring the wealthy 1% did not even throw a bone to lower-class taxpayers. After 1975 the average person ACTUALLY
lost money even if their wages stayed the same - due to loss of spending power, due to inflation. Not until about 2010 did average workers start to get small wage increases that moved them slightly ahead of inflation. And today due to Russian war aggression and Chinese Covid stupidity, the US is, likely, moving toward a DEEP recession and high inflation.
.........Before 1975 parents would always say that the NEXT generation would be better off than the last. After 1975 that could no longer be said! Today the US has the 1st world's most significant wealth disparity by far. US upward mobility is less than the UK. US health care outcomes (like birth fatalities) are ranked about 30th in the world.
........Face it folks........we are NOT the world leader that we were in the 1950s. We just remember it that way - the good old days of true US supremacy.
........Part of the cause of the US today leading the world in Mass murder IS the slow decline and today's disappearance of the middle class. And outsourcing to China to max out profits for greedy corporations was NOT very patriotic. Now we are so stupid that we can't get the parts we need from China to finish building US cars. The US allowed labor Unions to all but disappear. Funny, they seem to work in Germany, where management and the workers cooperate with each other. There are a lot of factors that have weakened the US middle class.
...........Up until recently, the US always was PROUD of its STRONG middle class.....no more. A strong middle class gives a country maximum STABILITY. The weak middle class and unresolved racial issues tear at the fabric of the nation. For further proof of instability look at the HUGE increases in US suicides and drug overdoses. The US has the highest wealth disparity in the world AND the highest, by far, amount of GUNS circulating in Civilian hands, AND WE may have the highest amount of dangerous drugs circulating in society and among young people. It seems LOGICAL that those factors would equate to more MASS MURDERS.
.........And, Oh yes, we DO lead the world, by far, in MASS MURDERS!

A lot of good points by you and the post you replied to. I'll just add a couple more, hopefully good points. I came from a broken home. Father took off when we were little kids, and we were raised by my mother. 4 kids, one parent who worked 10-12 hrs/day, 6 days a week. Yet we all turned out okay. Why? A big reason was because there was still an infrastructure in our schools to support kids like my brothers, sister, and me. There were counselors who actually knew who I was and who I could see without waiting weeks.
Fast-forward 30 years and there I am, a single parent with a son in High School and starting to get in trouble. I call the school to see if I could talk to a counselor - for 2000 students there is ONE counselor on staff. When I finally do see this poor frazzled guy, we tells me honestly that he has about 5 minutes to devote to each student and if I really care about getting my son help, I need to get him outside help. Luckily, I could afford it - many cannot and are just out of luck.

[jimjamuser]

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: "overthrow?" What kind of morons would attempt to overthrow a gov without the use of firearms? Folks need to cut back on viewing some of this main stream media. Too much hysteria being encouraged.
The "would be" government OVERTHROWERS did manage to injure about 200 Police officers and seriously wound several others. Some died later. We all saw the US Capital being overthrown and we saw the rioters beating a policeman's head while stuck in a door. We saw flag poes used as spears. Later we found out that the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers had GUNS and a boat waiting across the Potomac River.
.........We know that they chanted,"hang Mike Pense" and we saw the noose. They were NOT singing nursery rhymes and inviting Pense to a game of checkers. That WAS a DEADLY insurrection.
..........One person brought a knife into Nancy Pelosi's room. On Jan 5th there was a discussion about bringing guns and a few were found in one truck outside the capital. The Jan 6th insurrection was a perfect example of the tension that exists today throughout society. You add tension with the easy Assessability to GUNS and you have the reason for our last 2 MASS MURDERS being only 10 days apart. The immediate future holds GREAT potential for even INCREASED mass murders. The SOLUTION is to look at what other democratic countries have done to SOLVE their GUN problems.

[Stu from NYC]

I partly agree. About 1975(and on) things economically started going south in the US (and hope gradually went south). Tax breaks and tax brackets began to favor the wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle class. Recent tax changes favoring the wealthy 1% did not even throw a bone to lower-class taxpayers. After 1975 the average person ACTUALLY
lost money even if their wages stayed the same - due to loss of spending power, due to inflation. Not until about 2010 did average workers start to get small wage increases that moved them slightly ahead of inflation. And today due to Russian war aggression and Chinese Covid stupidity, the US is, likely, moving toward a DEEP recession and high inflation.
.........Before 1975 parents would always say that the NEXT generation would be better off than the last. After 1975 that could no longer be said! Today the US has the 1st world's most significant wealth disparity by far. US upward mobility is less than the UK. US health care outcomes (like birth fatalities) are ranked about 30th in the world.
........Face it folks........we are NOT the world leader that we were in the 1950s. We just remember it that way - the good old days of true US supremacy.
........Part of the cause of the US today leading the world in Mass murder IS the slow decline and today's disappearance of the middle class. And outsourcing to China to max out profits for greedy corporations was NOT very patriotic. Now we are so stupid that we can't get the parts we need from China to finish building US cars. The US allowed labor Unions to all but disappear. Funny, they seem to work in Germany, where management and the workers cooperate with each other. There are a lot of factors that have weakened the US middle class.
...........Up until recently, the US always was PROUD of its STRONG middle class.....no more. A strong middle class gives a country maximum STABILITY. The weak middle class and unresolved racial issues tear at the fabric of the nation. For further proof of instability look at the HUGE increases in US suicides and drug overdoses. The US has the highest wealth disparity in the world AND the highest, by far, amount of GUNS circulating in Civilian hands, AND WE may have the highest amount of dangerous drugs circulating in society and among young people. It seems LOGICAL that those factors would equate to more MASS MURDERS.
.........And, Oh yes, we DO lead the world, by far, in MASS MURDERS!

Wow you have a negative view of the US. Not perfect but still think we are the greatest country in the world.

[jimjamuser]

A lot of good points by you and the post you replied to. I'll just add a couple more, hopefully good points. I came from a broken home. Father took off when we were little kids, and we were raised by my mother. 4 kids, one parent who worked 10-12 hrs/day, 6 days a week. Yet we all turned out okay. Why? A big reason was because there was still an infrastructure in our schools to support kids like my brothers, sister, and me. There were counselors who actually knew who I was and who I could see without waiting weeks.
Fast-forward 30 years and there I am, a single parent with a son in High School and starting to get in trouble. I call the school to see if I could talk to a counselor - for 2000 students there is ONE counselor on staff. When I finally do see this poor frazzled guy, we tells me honestly that he has about 5 minutes to devote to each student and if I really care about getting my son help, I need to get him outside help. Luckily, I could afford it - many cannot and are just out of luck.
That's a good post about schools. I would just quickly say that whenever you see a problem (like a frazzled school counselor) look to TAXES, believe it or not! Schools are financed by property taxes and rich people have the most property - so they get their own school board members elected to keep school costs DOWN. That is why public schools end up with 30 plus in each classroom - less learning and more "acting out".
........Then the rich people want better schools for THEIR children so they invent CHARTER SCHOOLS. The public schools get less money and become INCUBATORS for a "dumbed down" US society, customers for drug dealers, and enough TENSION to create the world's largest numbers of MASS MURDERERS!

[MDLNB]

Making more gun laws is stupid, period.
Stopping the cause is the idea. The cause is PEOPLE, not guns. Take the gun away or limit it all you want, but all you will do is build your own ego, not protect anyone. As a matter of fact, more people are save than murdered in this country by guns. Over a million last year were saved by some good citizen with a gun. Take away the gang murders in the main cities and our country will have the least amount of gun related murders in the world.....or close to it. Any gun laws you make in the country will only make murders worse, not better. Why? Because then the good guys will be restricted/ hands tied and won't be able to keep the stats down. The bad guys are not going to worry about breaking a gun related law when they plan to break the MURDER law.
THEY will NEVER in our lifetime or our grandkids lifetime ever be able to get rid of guns in our country, not matter what drug induced fantasy they might dream up. It's kind of like expecting to stop DUIs by getting rid of the cars. They tried getting rid of alcohol and we all know how that worked out. Guns can be printed out and they won't have a serial number to trace.

[dewilson58]

...

So many want-to-be, jealous posts..............quite obvious.

Rather than working smartly and hard and achieving the life-style desired, it's much easier to complain about successful people.

"poor me"

:ohdear:

[MartinSE]

Making more gun laws is stupid, period.
Stopping the cause is the idea. The cause is PEOPLE, not guns. Take the gun away or limit it all you want, but all you will do is build your own ego, not protect anyone. As a matter of fact, more people are save than murdered in this country by guns. Over a million last year were saved by some good citizen with a gun. Take away the gang murders in the main cities and our country will have the least amount of gun related murders in the world.....or close to it. Any gun laws you make in the country will only make murders worse, not better. Why? Because then the good guys will be restricted/ hands tied and won't be able to keep the stats down. The bad guys are not going to worry about breaking a gun related law when they plan to break the MURDER law.
You will NEVER in our lifetime or our grandkids lifetime ever be able to get rid of guns in our country, not matter what drug induced fantasy you might dream up. It's kind of like expecting to stop DUIs by getting rid of the cars. They tried getting rid of alcohol and we all know how that worked out. Guns can be printed out and they won't have a serial number to trace.

You keep saying the same thing over and over. When I do that people seem to get upset.

Oh well.

Do you have ANY suggestions on how to reduce the number of kids murdered every year?

I agree banning ANY guns will not work and banning all guns will not work. So, I have posted several detailed suggestions on what I think would help.

I would appreciate hearing what you think will help. Stopping the cause is not an answer, since we do not yet know the cause. So, what can we do while we try to find the cause and fix it?

[Reiver]

The Girandoni air rifle was an airgun designed by Tyrolian inventor Bartholomäus Girandoni circa 1779. It was used on the Lewis and Clark Expedition in the early 1800s.
It is capable of discharging it's entire 20 shot capacity in less than 30 seconds.
The Girandoni Air Rifle: The Lewis and Clark Expedition's Secret Weapon (https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/military-history/lewis-and-clarks-girandoni-air-rifle/)

The first successful design for a semi-automatic rifle is attributed to Austria-born gunsmith Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher, who unveiled the design in 1885.

Why are these antique weapons suddenly a modern problem? How can it possibly be the weapon?

[jimjamuser]

Wow you have a negative view of the US. Not perfect but still think we are the greatest country in the world.
I used to think that the US was a GREAT country from about 1950 to 1975. In about 1975 I found out that US wage earners were actually falling backward in earnings due to inflation. If today, I was age 22, I would travel around Europe and Australia and New Zealand - I would see if I liked the weather and the people. Then, if I liked one country I would see if I could move there as a visa worker or to go for citizenship. The US will remain a power in the world militarily and economically, but it ranks pretty low on "quality of life" issues compared to other countries.
........I also predict near-future problems and changes from today to about 2026. IMO it is about a 50% probability that by 2026 the US is NOT even classified as a Democracy.
.........And after 2 mass murders in 10 days, NOTHING will change. If anything, people will buy more guns, which will equal more crime and more MASS MURDERS. America will "keep on, keeping on". I just HOPE that it does NOT reach you and yours or me and mine! Good luck.

[jimjamuser]

Making more gun laws is stupid, period.
Stopping the cause is the idea. The cause is PEOPLE, not guns. Take the gun away or limit it all you want, but all you will do is build your own ego, not protect anyone. As a matter of fact, more people are save than murdered in this country by guns. Over a million last year were saved by some good citizen with a gun. Take away the gang murders in the main cities and our country will have the least amount of gun related murders in the world.....or close to it. Any gun laws you make in the country will only make murders worse, not better. Why? Because then the good guys will be restricted/ hands tied and won't be able to keep the stats down. The bad guys are not going to worry about breaking a gun related law when they plan to break the MURDER law.
You will NEVER in our lifetime or our grandkids lifetime ever be able to get rid of guns in our country, not matter what drug induced fantasy you might dream up. It's kind of like expecting to stop DUIs by getting rid of the cars. They tried getting rid of alcohol and we all know how that worked out. Guns can be printed out and they won't have a serial number to trace.
Not very nice to say that I am on a "drug-induced " fantasy. I would NEVER, never say that about you or anyone on TOTV. I am NOT for taking away GUNS designed for hunting, targets, or home protection. I am against the NRA and greedy manufacturers that have (through propaganda) moved shooters AWAY from sportsman-type rifles and TOWARD selling weapons of WAR to CIVILIANS. Think about that........it makes no sense.......it is a CON JOB by the manufacturers and the NRA. They make the profits and the average people in America get shot buying groceries and their children die and bleed at school.
........I would rather live with a bolt action to defend my home than have excessive weapons of WAR circulating in society. But, I know it is too late. I just want to be on record as saying that it does not HAVE to be this way. And it WILL get worse. And I don't want to hear the childish propaganda about "a good guy with a gun " and that "slippery slope" sing-song crap!

[Kenswing]

I just want to be on record as saying that it does not HAVE to be this way. And it WILL get worse. And I don't want to hear the childish propaganda about "a good guy with a gun " and that "slippery slope" sing-song crap! Okay you’re on record. Feel better?

[biker1]

"Weapons of war" are fully automatic weapons. The vast majority of firearms are semi-automatic. Big difference and a difference that is lost on apparently most people. While it is possible to own a fully automatic weapon (typically collectors), there are a lot of hoops to jump through including approval by the Federal Government. It is a common mistake to assume your average Joe can buy an automatic weapon - he can't. Stop calling the firearms that people can actually buy "weapons of war" - they are not and it is disingenuous to say so.

Not very nice to say that I am on a "drug-induced " fantasy. I would NEVER, never say that about you or anyone on TOTV. I am NOT for taking away GUNS designed for hunting, targets, or home protection. I am against the NRA and greedy manufacturers that have (through propaganda) moved shooters AWAY from sportsman-type rifles and TOWARD selling weapons of WAR to CIVILIANS. Think about that........it makes no sense.......it is a CON JOB by the manufacturers and the NRA. They make the profits and the average people in America get shot buying groceries and their children die and bleed at school.
........I would rather live with a bolt action to defend my home than have excessive weapons of WAR circulating in society. But, I know it is too late. I just want to be on record as saying that it does not HAVE to be this way. And it WILL get worse. And I don't want to hear the childish propaganda about "a good guy with a gun " and that "slippery slope" sing-song crap!

[jimjamuser]

"Weapons of war" are fully automatic weapons. The vast majority of firearms are semi-automatic. Big difference and a difference that is lost on apparently most people. While it is possible to own a fully automatic weapon (typically collectors), there are a lot of hoops to jump through including approval by the Federal Government. It is a common mistake to assume your average Joe can buy an automatic weapon - he can't. Stop calling the firearms that people can actually buy "weapons of war" - they are not and it is disingenuous to say so.
Actually, ALL semi-automatics can be EASILY modified to fully automatic. And they are closer to Man-killers or weapons of war than a bolt-action, lever, or pump-action deer hunter.

[biker1]

All? Really? I didn't know you were a gunsmith. Regardless, please stop with the strawman arguments. Feel free to argue against facts with someone else.

Actually, ALL semi-automatics can be EASILY modified to fully automatic. And they are closer to Man-killers or weapons of war than a bolt-action, lever, or pump-action deer hunter.

[spd2918]

Actually, ALL semi-automatics can be EASILY modified to fully automatic. And they are closer to Man-killers or weapons of war than a bolt-action, lever, or pump-action deer hunter.

Not true all, and even if it were, firing on full auto greatly reduces accuracy. Have you ever fired one? I have. Good luck staying on target.

But please tell us how many school shooters used fully automatic military weapons.

[Taltarzac725]

What did Thomas Jefferson read? This may get an idea of what the 2nd Amendment meant in at least his eyes.

Thomas Jefferson's Reading Lists (https://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/reading2.htm)

And in other Founding Fathers--

Gun Quotes From Our Founding Fathers - 2nd Amendment (https://www.concealedcarry.com/gun-quotes-from-our-founding-fathers-2nd-amendment/)

[MrChip72]

Stopping the cause is not an answer, since we do not yet know the cause.

I'm pretty confident that any non-biased person that compares the US to the other G7 countries in school shootings can tell what the cause is. The US is over 50x higher per capita than the other G7 countries combined in school shootings.

There's literally one main difference between the US and those other countries.

[Normal]

I’m tired of hearing of the shootings. No one wants to see kids lives needlessly snuffed out, but banning guns aren’t the answer for the sick mind who did this. We should all count our blessings he didn’t use a pump shotgun with magazine extensions. It would have been much worse. Canada banned assault weapons last year after their last mass shooting where 22 died in Portapique. I guess we will see how that turns out?

[Jack58033]

The Japanese play violent video games but it does not correlate to gun violence. They make it hard to get guns.They don't have a fraction of the guns we have. They don't have a percent of the deaths we have and no dead children in schools.

[jimbomaybe]

"Weapons of war" are fully automatic weapons. The vast majority of firearms are semi-automatic. Big difference and a difference that is lost on apparently most people. While it is possible to own a fully automatic weapon (typically collectors), there are a lot of hoops to jump through including approval by the Federal Government. It is a common mistake to assume your average Joe can buy an automatic weapon - he can't. Stop calling the firearms that people can actually buy "weapons of war" - they are not and it is disingenuous to say so.
I am waiting to hear how the conspiracy works between the NRA and the GREEDY manufactures to induce so many to buy "MANKILLERS" "WEAPONS OF WAR"

[jdulej]

I’m tired of hearing of the shootings. No one wants to see kids lives needlessly snuffed out, but banning guns aren’t the answer for the sick mind who did this. We should all count our blessings he didn’t use a pump shotgun with magazine extensions. It would have been much worse. Canada banned assault weapons last year after their last mass shooting where 22 died in Portapique. I guess we will see how that turns out?

If Canada's last mass slaughter was last year, I'd say they are already doing a heck of a lot better than the US is.

[Bay Kid]

Crazies will find a way. Sorry to say the world is full of crazies.

[Normal]

Crazies will find a way. Sorry to say the world is full of crazies.

And we are the incubator of “crazies”.

[MrFlorida]

The Japanese play violent video games but it does not correlate to gun violence. They make it hard to get guns.They don't have a fraction of the guns we have. They don't have a percent of the deaths we have and no dead children in schools.

True, but when you commit a crime in Japan, you go to jail and stay there....

[jdulej]

Crazies will find a way. Sorry to say the world is full of crazies.

You are right, the world is full of crazies, but for some reason the vast, vast majority of crazies who actually do "find a way" are in the good old USA. Do we have smarter crazies? Or do we make is so easy for them to "find a way" that even the dumbest of the crazies manages with few, if any, issues.

Scrolling through the hundreds of comments, the theme I see most often from the gun supporters is "it's not guns, it's mental health, deal with the actual problem". What I don't get is why the objection to keeping guns (or at least high capacity, mass slaughter type guns) out of the hands of folks with mental health issues until such time as they are "cured" or deemed not at a dangerous level of crazy. Yet, even suggesting that is greeted with howls of "2nd Amendment!, 2nd Amendment".
I'm left with the feeling that what gun supporters really want done is nothing. They are fine with a little collateral damage now and then, they’ll shed a couple crocodile tears as long as they can keep their shiny toys.

[villager7591]

TJ; our best president. His main worry was Government control. He was worried about the Federal Government becoming too big, too powerful.
We are there !

[Keefelane66]

America: Home of well-regulated women and barely-regulated guns.

[jimbomaybe]

You are right, the world is full of crazies, but for some reason the vast, vast majority of crazies who actually do "find a way" are in the good old USA. Do we have smarter crazies? Or do we make is so easy for them to "find a way" that even the dumbest of the crazies manages with few, if any, issues.

Scrolling through the hundreds of comments, the theme I see most often from the gun supporters is "it's not guns, it's mental health, deal with the actual problem". What I don't get is why the objection to keeping guns (or at least high capacity, mass slaughter type guns) out of the hands of folks with mental health issues until such time as they are "cured" or deemed not at a dangerous level of crazy. Yet, even suggesting that is greeted with howls of "2nd Amendment!, 2nd Amendment".
I'm left with the feeling that what gun supporters really want done is nothing. They are fine with a little collateral damage now and then, they’ll shed a couple crocodile tears as long as they can keep their shiny toys.

The problem is , just who is unstable to the point of being denied the ownership of weapons, over the years we have seen more and more disturbed people wandering the streets,, progress?

[MartinSE]

The problem is , just who is unstable to the point of being denied the ownership of weapons, over the years we have seen more and more disturbed people wandering the streets,, progress?

I will go one step further, restricting any rights to anyone with a mental illness is the very definition of a slippery slope. Who gets to decide. And what is mental illness?

And every time the Administration changes parties we get another swing in "rights".

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Not true all, and even if it were, firing on full auto greatly reduces accuracy. Have you ever fired one? I have. Good luck staying on target.

But please tell us how many school shooters used fully automatic military weapons.

When you're shooting into a crowd and hoping to hit as many people as possible with no singular target in mind, then accuracy doesn't matter much.

The more shots you can fire in a short period of time, the more likely you'll hit a lot of people. That's why these weapons are the weapons of choice for *mass shooters*. As opposed to - rocks, knives, single-shot rifles and pistols, 6-shooters, crossbows, baseball bats, a car, or a chainsaw (for example).

[Reiver]

The Japanese play violent video games but it does not correlate to gun violence. They make it hard to get guns.They don't have a fraction of the guns we have. They don't have a percent of the deaths we have and no dead children in schools.

The Japanese don't have nearly the amount of freedom that we do. Stop and frisk is common, as are home searches. Possession of cannabis has a jail sentence of up to five years for the first offense. Authorities can detain a suspect for up to three weeks without charges. A lot of people confess before they are told what the charges are. The conviction rate of those prosecuted exceeds 99%. Japan pretty much leads the world in human trafficking.

For what it's worth, the 2021 Fentanyl overdose death count of 14 to 18 years old was about 800.
For the category of 18 to 45 years old the Fentanyl death count was 64,178.

[Reiver]

When you're shooting into a crowd and hoping to hit as many people as possible with no singular target in mind, then accuracy doesn't matter much.

The more shots you can fire in a short period of time, the more likely you'll hit a lot of people. That's why these weapons are the weapons of choice for *mass shooters*. As opposed to - rocks, knives, single-shot rifles and pistols, 6-shooters, crossbows, baseball bats, a car, or a chainsaw (for example).

The worst school related mass murder in the USA is still the 1927 bombing in Bath, MI.

The astoundingly, incredibly, overwhelming high count of rampage killings at any school worldwide is 65 since 1913, with about 589 deaths in total. That's 211 fewer deaths than the count of kids aged 14 to 18 who died due to a Fentanyl overdose in one year alone.

List of school massacres by death toll - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_massacres_by_death_toll)

[jimbomaybe]

I will go one step further, restricting any rights to anyone with a mental illness is the very definition of a slippery slope. Who gets to decide. And what is mental illness?

And every time the Administration changes parties we get another swing in "rights".


Hindsight to be sure, but I don't think too many people would argue that these mass shooters have to have something very wrong with them,, how to predict with any accuracy,, but then as I have pointed out this is historically a relatively new phenomenon, what has changed ?

[jimjamuser]

All? Really? I didn't know you were a gunsmith. Regardless, please stop with the strawman arguments. Feel free to argue against facts with someone else.
Sorry, I don't see the point of the argument against my statement. I stand by it. Semi-autos can be easily converted to full automatic.
...........Regardless, it is normally better in a battle to squeeze off a WELL-AIMED shot than to spray shots around on automatic. I know a man that was on patrol in dense jungle in Viet Nam - it was a tense time because enemy forces were assumed to be in the area. His rifle was set on full auto and he heard a loud noise in front of him. He pointed his weapon at the source of the noise and pulled the trigger. The result was a nice Pheasant to eat back at the base.
..........I am NOT sure if this example shows the value of full-automatic or the opposite.

[jdulej]

I will go one step further, restricting any rights to anyone with a mental illness is the very definition of a slippery slope. Who gets to decide. And what is mental illness?

And every time the Administration changes parties we get another swing in "rights".

I was rooting around in google trying to see if background checks include events from when a person was a minor. No luck with that search so far. I was wondering because it seemed to me that running a background check on someone 2 days over 18 was pretty pointless unless the check includes events going back to the person's minor years. Anyway, I did see this:

"The NICS has conducted more than 300 million checks since launching in 1998, leading to over 3 million denials.

The following groups are currently prohibited from owning guns:

Convicted felons
People under federal domestic restraining orders
People convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes against victims they have been married to, lived with, or had a child with
People committed to a mental-health facility, or a court ruled were mentally unfit
Fugitives
People convicted of drug crimes or determined to by a court to be addicted to an illegal controlled substance"

The devil, of course, is in the details. For example, the domestic violence check seems to be fine with someone beating the crap out of their girlfriend or boyfriend, just not their wife or husband.
Also, the Mental Health category is very squishy with poor record keeping and reporting.

It appears that much of the infrastructure is in place to block sales to mentally ill individuals, it's just not being executed very well. Plus, my initial point holds. It's unlikely that the most crazy, homicidal maniac would have a record in the database if they are only 18 by 2 days!

Personally, I think applicants should have to prove they are not mentally ill, rather than the other way round as it is today. Mass Killing is mostly a one and done type of crime, as the perp usually takes the cowards way out or lets the cops do it for him/her.

[jimjamuser]

I'm pretty confident that any non-biased person that compares the US to the other G7 countries in school shootings can tell what the cause is. The US is over 50x higher per capita than the other G7 countries combined in school shootings.

There's literally one main difference between the US and those other countries.
Yes. I have been trying to argue FOR that point. It IS a STATISTICAL fact. But, here we have facts overwhelmed by EMOTIONS and propaganda repeated by the NRA. Emotions are a POWERFUL factor in winning an argument - they can beat facts, often in the short term.
.........I wonder how often children and adults have to die in mass murders or get hurt in mass shootings before the FACTS and the SOLUTION sink into the American ethos?

[jimjamuser]

I am waiting to hear how the conspiracy works between the NRA and the GREEDY manufactures to induce so many to buy "MANKILLERS" "WEAPONS OF WAR"
Well, that's EXACTLY how it developed. It's not even a conspiracy between the NRA and the GUN manufacturers. The NRA is obviously in bed with the GUN makers - the NRA is the MOUTHPIECE of the GUN makers. I WAS an NRA member until 1967 when their magazine started getting devoted to "weapons of war" and military-style semi-autos. Gone were articles on upland game hunting and best rifles for hunting in thick woods and what was best for hunting on the Western plains - what was best for Alaska.
..........The majority of the NRA magazine articles became about military weapons and their accessories. I finally realized that US citizens began to hunt less so shotguns and bolt-action deer rifles were becoming less profitable. The gun makers began to VIRTUALLY make up their own (more profitable) market by using near propaganda advertisements that tended to equate masculinity and patriotism with the AR 15 style weapons and 30 round banana mags.
..........Most states at that time required deer hunting to be done with magazines of 5 rounds or less. I believe that Ohio required deer and bear hunting with shotguns - which were considered safer than rifles. I don't know if that has been changed. Myself, I think it would be a little humorous to see some fool hunting deer with a 30-round mag. It would be constantly hung up on tree branches as the hunter moved. There was an old saying, "one shot, one deer, but 3 shots, no deer".
..........The Jan 6th insurrection showed how powerful IS the symbolic connection between pseudo-macho-patriotism and the many flags of the insurgents that glorified military-style AR-15s. NRA propaganda had won that day in the distorted minds of the participants.

[jimjamuser]

If Canada's last mass slaughter was last year, I'd say they are already doing a heck of a lot better than the US is.
Agreed !

[jimjamuser]

America: Home of well-regulated women and barely-regulated guns.
Nice. Good one! Kudos !

[jimjamuser]

America: Home of well-regulated women and barely-regulated guns.
On our way to the "Handmaid's Tale"!

[MDLNB]

You keep saying the same thing over and over. When I do that people seem to get upset.

Oh well.

Do you have ANY suggestions on how to reduce the number of kids murdered every year?

I agree banning ANY guns will not work and banning all guns will not work. So, I have posted several detailed suggestions on what I think would help.

I would appreciate hearing what you think will help. Stopping the cause is not an answer, since we do not yet know the cause. So, what can we do while we try to find the cause and fix it?


I agree with you. Harden the schools. Even a ten foot fence around the school with an armed security officer at the gate would probably discourage a killing. Of course, then they would just go to a movie theater, church, shopping mall, etc. At least the kids would be safe for a while. At least until they got older.

Yes, I do repeat myself when someone else says the same thing that someone else has said about the subject.

More restricting laws just keeps the good citizens honest while taking away a bit more of their freedom and liberty. It doesn't solve the problem, the mentally unstable. And I would rather an occasional unstable running amok than confined security with no option for our own safety.

[MDLNB]

Not very nice to say that I am on a "drug-induced " fantasy. I would NEVER, never say that about you or anyone on TOTV. I am NOT for taking away GUNS designed for hunting, targets, or home protection. I am against the NRA and greedy manufacturers that have (through propaganda) moved shooters AWAY from sportsman-type rifles and TOWARD selling weapons of WAR to CIVILIANS. Think about that........it makes no sense.......it is a CON JOB by the manufacturers and the NRA. They make the profits and the average people in America get shot buying groceries and their children die and bleed at school.
........I would rather live with a bolt action to defend my home than have excessive weapons of WAR circulating in society. But, I know it is too late. I just want to be on record as saying that it does not HAVE to be this way. And it WILL get worse. And I don't want to hear the childish propaganda about "a good guy with a gun " and that "slippery slope" sing-song crap!


Sorry if you took that as aimed at you. Not meant that way. The use of "you" was not meant for any particular person, and I could have just as easily used the word "they" in it's place. I will go back an edit that so that you won't be offended, which is not what I intended. I am sure you know that if intended, I could use much more descriptive verbiage.:)

[Taltarzac725]

Serving Rural America — Rural Minds (https://www.ruralminds.org/serving-rural-america)

There are a lot of resources for helping the mentally ill online and other places. There is still a huge stigma attached to asking for help which does stop some people from doing so.

I was elated last night when they did a tribute to a soldier lost on a different battlefield. He had committed suicide due to depression. This tragedy told on the Memorial Day Concert done by Gary Sinise and others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb88V9dEoGs

National Memorial Day Concert | PBS (https://www.pbs.org/national-memorial-day-concert/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=memorial_2022)

Make a Donation | Gary Sinise Foundation (https://www.garysinisefoundation.org/donate?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIl5Te64SI-AIVmIvICh1TmAVMEAAYASAAEgJN2_D_BwE)

[MDLNB]

Not very nice to say that I am on a "drug-induced " fantasy. I would NEVER, never say that about you or anyone on TOTV. I am NOT for taking away GUNS designed for hunting, targets, or home protection. I am against the NRA and greedy manufacturers that have (through propaganda) moved shooters AWAY from sportsman-type rifles and TOWARD selling weapons of WAR to CIVILIANS. Think about that........it makes no sense.......it is a CON JOB by the manufacturers and the NRA. They make the profits and the average people in America get shot buying groceries and their children die and bleed at school.
........I would rather live with a bolt action to defend my home than have excessive weapons of WAR circulating in society. But, I know it is too late. I just want to be on record as saying that it does not HAVE to be this way. And it WILL get worse. And I don't want to hear the childish propaganda about "a good guy with a gun " and that "slippery slope" sing-song crap!
And so you say my comment is "childish?" That's OK, I don't take offense easily. Unfortunately, folks that do not wish to be reasonable will discount FACT such as the FACT that over a Million people were saved last year when a GOOD person with a gun intervened. But, they can continue to live in their own world of disbelief.

Why have a bolt action rifle for self defense in your home anyway, when you can have a handgun that is more efficient in your self defense?

I agree that it is too late to do anything about the amount of guns in America. And in my opinion (childish?? ha,ha) that is because of how lenient the courts have become and how rampant robberies and assaults have become. People know that it's true that when seconds count, help is minutes away.

Ronny Reagan once said: "Because you won't get gun control by disarming law abiding citizens. There's only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don't actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time. (https://www.azquotes.com/quote/578118)
Another of many:
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. (https://www.azquotes.com/quote/241177)

[MDLNB]

Actually, ALL semi-automatics can be EASILY modified to fully automatic. And they are closer to Man-killers or weapons of war than a bolt-action, lever, or pump-action deer hunter.


Hmm, I would like to know what experience you base your statement upon. I carried a shotgun in Vietnam and it was very effective in jungle fighting. I also carried one as a COP in my car. I also trained and carried a bolt action rifle for sniper use, professionally. It is unlawful to modify a weapon to make it fully automatic. Even bump stock operation was not outlawed in the past because it was not considered a fully automatic operation.

Sometimes people speak out about things they have heard without the benefit of experience.

[MartinSE]

I was rooting around in google trying to see if background checks include events from when a person was a minor. No luck with that search so far. I was wondering because it seemed to me that running a background check on someone 2 days over 18 was pretty pointless unless the check includes events going back to the person's minor years. Anyway, I did see this:

"The NICS has conducted more than 300 million checks since launching in 1998, leading to over 3 million denials.

The following groups are currently prohibited from owning guns:

Convicted felons
People under federal domestic restraining orders
People convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes against victims they have been married to, lived with, or had a child with
People committed to a mental-health facility, or a court ruled were mentally unfit
Fugitives
People convicted of drug crimes or determined to by a court to be addicted to an illegal controlled substance"

The devil, of course, is in the details. For example, the domestic violence check seems to be fine with someone beating the crap out of their girlfriend or boyfriend, just not their wife or husband.
Also, the Mental Health category is very squishy with poor record keeping and reporting.

It appears that much of the infrastructure is in place to block sales to mentally ill individuals, it's just not being executed very well. Plus, my initial point holds. It's unlikely that the most crazy, homicidal maniac would have a record in the database if they are only 18 by 2 days!

Personally, I think applicants should have to prove they are not mentally ill, rather than the other way round as it is today. Mass Killing is mostly a one and done type of crime, as the perp usually takes the cowards way out or lets the cops do it for him/her.

Selective enforcement is a problem.

My previous wife experienced domestic violence and reported it. Nothing happened. She finally took her kids and escaped to a shelter. Her husband at the time got ****ed, and bought a rifle. Why if that significant? He was a convicted felon and he had no problem buying a gun.

So much for “rules” doing any good. Children are dying. How about some plan to do something to slow down the dying.

Lots of posts about how important it is to own a gun, few post on how to actually some something to just help.

[MartinSE]

Hmm, I would like to know what experience you base your statement upon. I carried a shotgun in Vietnam and it was very effective in jungle fighting. I also carried one as a COP in my car. I also trained and carried a bolt action rifle for sniper use, professionally. It is unlawful to modify a weapon to make it fully automatic. Even bump stock operation was not outlawed in the past because it was not considered a fully automatic operation.

Sometimes people speak out about things they have heard without the benefit of experience.

I don’t know why it being unlawful to do something is going to help reduce the murders. I don’t think it is lawful to murder 19 children, but he did.

Debating legalities is not going to lead to a solution, even though I agree with your point it doesn’t help.

[MDLNB]

The Japanese play violent video games but it does not correlate to gun violence. They make it hard to get guns.They don't have a fraction of the guns we have. They don't have a percent of the deaths we have and no dead children in schools.


I don't disagree with your statement but I will add this. I have lived in Japan twice in my lifetime. Japan has just about the population of half our country from the Mississippi river to the West coast. All those folks are packed into a country Island about the size of California. They are so crowded that the use of a long rifle is almost impossible. It is so crowded that when I rode their trains, passengers were literally packed/pushed into the train cars so that the doors could close. They also have a totally different culture than we do and have a great bit of respect for each other. Ever heard the expression "save face?"

[jimjamuser]

Hindsight to be sure, but I don't think too many people would argue that these mass shooters have to have something very wrong with them,, how to predict with any accuracy,, but then as I have pointed out this is historically a relatively new phenomenon, what has changed ?
As I have mentioned before, the answer is that US gun ownership went from 300 to 400 million in the last 2 years. That answers, why Mass Murders are increasing. Now the question is WHY that big increase (about 15% per year) in US GUN ownership. Somehow (?) the social fabric togetherness is unraveling?
..........One thing I know, Russia and China are happy about the US unraveling! The Proud Boys, The Oath Keepers, The 3% ers, and other anarchists are overjoyed !
...........Another thing I know is that the US being the 1st world's leader in wealth disparity does NOT make a society MORE stable. The average person sees the problem when the top 1% ers keep getting wealthier. Jeff Bezos's yacht is about 4 football fields long, with a separate baby yacht to land his girlfriend's helicopter. Elon Musk has done a few strange things. A tax base that helped resurrect the middle class is needed today before things get LESS stable.
........Another thing - the near future (now until 2026) looks pretty dire and unpredictable. I wish the US had 100% of its citizens vote like Australia does! We have a lot to lose!

[MDLNB]

Sorry, I don't see the point of the argument against my statement. I stand by it. Semi-autos can be easily converted to full automatic.
...........Regardless, it is normally better in a battle to squeeze off a WELL-AIMED shot than to spray shots around on automatic. I know a man that was on patrol in dense jungle in Viet Nam - it was a tense time because enemy forces were assumed to be in the area. His rifle was set on full auto and he heard a loud noise in front of him. He pointed his weapon at the source of the noise and pulled the trigger. The result was a nice Pheasant to eat back at the base.
..........I am NOT sure if this example shows the value of full-automatic or the opposite.


Yes, yes, I saw that movie.

[jimjamuser]

I agree with you. Harden the schools. Even a ten foot fence around the school with an armed security officer at the gate would probably discourage a killing. Of course, then they would just go to a movie theater, church, shopping mall, etc. At least the kids would be safe for a while. At least until they got older.

Yes, I do repeat myself when someone else says the same thing that someone else has said about the subject.

More restricting laws just keeps the good citizens honest while taking away a bit more of their freedom and liberty. It doesn't solve the problem, the mentally unstable. And I would rather an occasional unstable running amok than confined security with no option for our own safety.
The "OCCASIONAL UNSTABLE" seems to be becoming more and more the norm. We don't have a stable 1950s society today so we need new SOLUTIONS (safety from guns) similar to what other G7 countries have done. WE are falling
behind other countries due to our own stubbornness and glorification of the Western Frontier, rugged individualism, the macho GUN culture, and the AR 15 as a SYMBOL of something (?) emotional.

[jimjamuser]

Sorry if you took that as aimed at you. Not meant that way. The use of "you" was not meant for any particular person, and I could have just as easily used the word "they" in it's place. I will go back an edit that so that you won't be offended, which is not what I intended. I am sure you know that if intended, I could use much more descriptive verbiage.:)
That was kind of a yeah / boo apology. Sort of blames me a 2nd time. Wonderful, so contrite.
........I thought that was what was wrong with the country? No one takes individual responsibility for anything.
........But, I will let it go as just an agree to disagree situation.

[jimjamuser]

Hmm, I would like to know what experience you base your statement upon. I carried a shotgun in Vietnam and it was very effective in jungle fighting. I also carried one as a COP in my car. I also trained and carried a bolt action rifle for sniper use, professionally. It is unlawful to modify a weapon to make it fully automatic. Even bump stock operation was not outlawed in the past because it was not considered a fully automatic operation.

Sometimes people speak out about things they have heard without the benefit of experience.
Yes, a shotgun IS useful to a limited extent in close quarters-type military situations. But, it is NOT the STANDARD issue for the majority of Army troops. And shotguns are very useful to Police.

[jebartle]

For the poster that suggest I go live in Japan, is a perfect example of the intolerance for ANY suggestions to stop this violence. Let's pull together as AMERICANS and solve this. REALLY REALLY lock schools (obviously this Texas school needs correction, if we see SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING and to lighten this post, I hope it's possible on such a serious subject, just sell guns, NO AMMO, giggle

[Taltarzac725]

Use every approach that works. Gun buy backs. Mental health awareness spread as wide as possible. Locking doors as much as possible in schools and other soft targets. Situational awareness, etc.



For the poster that suggest I go live in Japan, is a perfect example of the intolerance for ANY suggestions to stop this violence. Let's pull together as AMERICANS and solve this. REALLY REALLY lock schools (obviously this Texas school needs correction, if we see SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING and to lighten this post, I hope it's possible on such a serious subject, just sell guns, NO AMMO, giggle

[Reiver]

Gun buy backs do not work. Most of the guns turned in do not work.. or, they have been used in a crime and people take advantage of "no questions asked" to get rid of them.

[MartinSE]

One thing is certain, we now know a lot of things that will not work. Mean while, soon, more children WILL die.t

[Stu from NYC]

Use every approach that works. Gun buy backs. Mental health awareness spread as wide as possible. Locking doors as much as possible in schools and other soft targets. Situational awareness, etc.

I agree with most of what you say but do not think gun buy backs will works as the ones we all would want off the streets are not coming back.

[tvbound]

I'll bet in those states where open-carry of long guns (ie:AR-15) is allowed, a whole lot of people who oppose even a single thing being done about our gun problem, might start changing their minds and looking for compromises - if all of a sudden a lot of young black men started walking around with them. Who knows, it could also be the start of serious talks about addressing two of our country's biggest problems.

[jimjamuser]

Use every approach that works. Gun buy backs. Mental health awareness spread as wide as possible. Locking doors as much as possible in schools and other soft targets. Situational awareness, etc.
If we are throwing out minor SMALL fixes, a school could have a gun sniffing dog and an attack-trained dog. Good kids would like the dogs and the trouble-makers would have to respect and worry about them. This would be part of the "try different solutions to see what works".

[jimjamuser]

I'll bet in those states where open-carry of long guns (ie:AR-15) is allowed, a whole lot of people who oppose even a single thing being done about our gun problem, might start changing their minds and looking for compromises - if all of a sudden a lot of young black men started walking around with them. Who knows, it could also be the start of serious talks about addressing two of our country's biggest problems.
I lived in an early open carry-law state.......Arizona ( I was there about 1993) and it seemed a little weird to me. Many of the people that were open-carrying looked like the "bad guys" that I should be worrying about. The hairs on my neck would stand up when I was around some of them. Looks like we will be treated to this "wild west" mentality soon in Fl.

[MartinSE]

If we are throwing out minor SMALL fixes, a school could have a gun sniffing dog and an attack-trained dog. Good kids would like the dogs and the trouble-makers would have to respect and worry about them. This would be part of the "try different solutions to see what works".

I like this, sadly it wont happen soon. A lot of schools and small number of available dogs. But, certainly worth looking into.

[MartinSE]

I lived in an early open carry-law state.......Arizona ( I was there about 1993) and it seemed a little weird to me. Many of the people that were open-carrying looked like the "bad guys" that I should be worrying about. The hairs on my neck would stand up when I was around some of them. Looks like we will be treated to this "wild west" mentality soon in Fl.

I can relate. I was in Peoria, AZ (outside Phoenix) in the early 2000s. I was driving a cash register in a convenience store and frequently had the overnight shift. When someone came in openly carrying a gun it made more than my hair stand up. Our company had a policy if someone wanted to steal something, help them carry it out. Do not try to stop them. I never had to carry anything out, but a friend was shot and killed in another store because he tried to "protect" the company's money... he left a wife, and 2 grandchildren over $50 in the register.

[Woodbear]

Guns will never go away........93990

[MartinSE]

Guns will never go away........93990

Comparing our children to sheep? So, the children are the price we pay because we can't do anything, which seems to be a common idea here.

[Taltarzac725]

Better dealing with bullying and cyberbullying.

[Trayderjoe]

I am not so sure there is any room for compromise now, even if there was a small chance, now that the “quiet part” has been said out loud.

Earlier in this thread a poster used the analogy of “taking small bites of the elephant” I believe to indicate an attempt to chip away at the second amendment as is being done with the first amendment. Now there is a call to ban 9mm handguns which were referred to as “high caliber weapons”.

I believe that in order to compromise, you needed to start with the truth. Given that “assault weapon” and weapon of war” are emotional phrases used to describe certain firearms and are NOT BASED ON FACT, add the new mantra of “high caliber weapons” and this will slide into a total gun ban. Forget that bolt action rifles, as one poster here suggested would be ok, if those bolt action rifles are “high caliber” they get taken away too.

I stopped reading this thread because it again got to “wash, rinse, repeat”, but given that the quiet part has now been said out loud, here you go. If you still think there is an opportunity to debate, good luck. At least this thread was allowed to continue, congrats to all for keeping away from politics and staying on topic.

[jdulej]

I am not so sure there is any room for compromise now, even if there was a small chance, now that the “quiet part” has been said out loud.

Earlier in this thread a poster used the analogy of “taking small bites of the elephant” I believe to indicate an attempt to chip away at the second amendment as is being done with the first amendment. Now there is a call to ban 9mm handguns which were referred to as “high caliber weapons”.

I believe that in order to compromise, you needed to start with the truth. Given that “assault weapon” and weapon of war” are emotional phrases used to describe certain firearms and are NOT BASED ON FACT, add the new mantra of “high caliber weapons” and this will slide into a total gun ban. Forget that bolt action rifles, as one poster here suggested would be ok, if those bolt action rifles are “high caliber” they get taken away too.

I stopped reading this thread because it again got to “wash, rinse, repeat”, but given that the quiet part has now been said out loud, here you go. If you still think there is an opportunity to debate, good luck. At least this thread was allowed to continue, congrats to all for keeping away from politics and staying on topic.

Unfortunately, I am forced to agree with you. There is enough of a base of unwavering 2nd amendment supporters to stop any serious change. To them, having a few hundred innocents slaughtered is worth it. They don't want to say it out loud, but the fact that they offer no solutions and are against any limitations or management of gun ownership (not getting anywhere near saying gun banning - that ship has sailed) leads me to that horrible statement above - they just don't care.
Most likely, we need to wait for the baby boomer generation to die out. The NRA is fading, thank god, due to massive corruption at the top, so they should not be much of a player in a few years. That leaves the manufacturers, some of whom use absolutely disgusting marketing and sales techniques.

[Caymus]

I am not so sure there is any room for compromise now, even if there was a small chance, now that the “quiet part” has been said out loud.

Earlier in this thread a poster used the analogy of “taking small bites of the elephant” I believe to indicate an attempt to chip away at the second amendment as is being done with the first amendment. Now there is a call to ban 9mm handguns which were referred to as “high caliber weapons”.

I believe that in order to compromise, you needed to start with the truth. Given that “assault weapon” and weapon of war” are emotional phrases used to describe certain firearms and are NOT BASED ON FACT, add the new mantra of “high caliber weapons” and this will slide into a total gun ban. Forget that bolt action rifles, as one poster here suggested would be ok, if those bolt action rifles are “high caliber” they get taken away too.

I stopped reading this thread because it again got to “wash, rinse, repeat”, but given that the quiet part has now been said out loud, here you go. If you still think there is an opportunity to debate, good luck. At least this thread was allowed to continue, congrats to all for keeping away from politics and staying on topic.

In the end, gangbangers and other criminals will always have guns.

[MrFlorida]

Why not metal detectors ? seems like the sensible thing to have nowadays.

[MartinSE]

Why not metal detectors ? seems like the sensible thing to have nowadays.

Agreed. There should be a single point of entry with security, Biometric ID checking, and metal detectors. Plastic guns would still get through, so, I am not sure how that can be handled properly and in a way that can be afforded. Remember there are 130,000 K-12 schools in the US.

[dewilson58]

30x's as many murders by abortion than by guns.

BLM
(Baby Lives Matter)

:popcorn::popcorn:

[G.R.I.T.S.]

The Wild West had vigorous gun regulation in the towns and mass slaughters of civilians the likes of which we see so often did not happen.

Do you remember how horrified everyone was by Columbine in 1999. It had never happened before. In the last 22 years there have now been 13 mass school killings, defined as 3 or more deaths in a single incident.

Thoughts and prayers are not working.

Don’t know if this link will work:

A Brief History of Mass Shootings – Behind the Tower (http://behindthetower.org/a-brief-history-of-mass-shootings)

[Kenswing]

Agreed. There should be a single point of entry with security, Biometric ID checking, and metal detectors. Plastic guns would still get through, so, I am not sure how that can be handled properly and in a way that can be afforded. Remember there are 130,000 K-12 schools in the US.
Plastic guns? Get real. Do you have any idea how many shots you can get through a plastic barrel before it's useless? Even most "plastic" guns have metal barrels. Which a metal detector would... detect..

[Jensor17]

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

I agree. I was appalled years ago to see a grandson on gaming tv where he was supposed to shoot invaders or aliens coming through various doorways or alleys at rapid speed.

It was like a memory of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris in Columbine school shootings. THOSE TWO DEMENTED TEENS GOT DEADLY IDEAS FROM VIDEO GAME WHERE 2 Men in black long coats walked into a school and shot /killed teachers and kids ! THEY MADE A DEADLY GAME COME TO LIFE.

That type video game and similar “games” should be annihilated.
Kids repeat what they see and hear. It is how we “teach” them right from wrong. SUCH VIDEO GAMES OR DIGITAL GAMES SHOULD BE BANNED

[PennBF]

There are some of us who have lived and observed the period of destruction of our Society and the resultant Con regarding how to fixed it with a single act of change, e.g. gun control. We have seen the mental hospital's closed and the patients sent to the street., we have seen the church attendance significantly reduced, we have seen a tremendous growth in "entitlement" demands, we have seen people avoiding participation in work as they want needs given not earned, we have seen the Police and other authority groups, (e.g. teachers, etc) powers taken away, we have seen our children provided with electronic games which boast shootings, killings and the total disrespect for life, we have raised children who believe killing is a "game", we have made drugs legal or ignore their their use and effects on our lives, we have watched means of destroying total societies put in the hands of corrupt leaders, I am sure many more conditions can be identified by those who have also lived many many many years and are not fooled by the con that controlling guns will make our lives better. How many have heard a senior citizen say "I am glad I am living now as I would not want to be the children of today who have to deal with what we are leaving behind"? Let's not be fooled by the corrupt intellectuals who preach that gun controls will fix our problems but rather re-establish values that return us to a great society. :ohdear:

[jdulej]

I agree. I was appalled years ago to see a grandson on gaming tv where he was supposed to shoot invaders or aliens coming through various doorways or alleys at rapid speed.

It was like a memory of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris in Columbine school shootings. THOSE TWO DEMENTED TEENS GOT DEADLY IDEAS FROM VIDEO GAME WHERE 2 Men in black long coats walked into a school and shot /killed teachers and kids ! THEY MADE A DEADLY GAME COME TO LIFE.

That type video game and similar “games” should be annihilated.
Kids repeat what they see and hear. It is how we “teach” them right from wrong. SUCH VIDEO GAMES OR DIGITAL GAMES SHOULD BE BANNED
I'm no fan of video games, especially shoot-em-ups or violence against women ones. BUT, those same games are played all over the world yet only in the USA do we see mass killings on such a scale. They may be a part (small part) of the problem, but there is much more going on

[MrFlorida]

Agreed. There should be a single point of entry with security, Biometric ID checking, and metal detectors. Plastic guns would still get through, so, I am not sure how that can be handled properly and in a way that can be afforded. Remember there are 130,000 K-12 schools in the US.

Plastic guns still have to have a steel barrel and slide.

[MartinSE]

Plastic guns? Get real. Do you have any idea how many shots you can get through a plastic barrel before it's useless? Even most "plastic" guns have metal barrels. Which a metal detector would... detect..

Agreed.

So? I just mentioned plastic since any suggestions that aren’t 100% effective get shot down here.

[jdulej]

There are some of us who have lived and observed the period of destruction of our Society and the resultant Con regarding how to fixed it with a single act of change, e.g. gun control. We have seen the mental hospital's closed and the patients sent to the street., we have seen the church attendance significantly reduced, we have seen a tremendous growth in "entitlement" demands, we have seen people avoiding participation in work as they want needs given not earned, we have seen the Police and other authority groups, (e.g. teachers, etc) powers taken away, we have seen our children provided with electronic games which boast shootings, killings and the total disrespect for life, we have raised children who believe killing is a "game", we have made drugs legal or ignore their their use and effects on our lives, we have watched means of destroying total societies put in the hands of corrupt leaders, I am sure many more conditions can be identified by those who have also lived many many many years and are not fooled by the con that controlling guns will make our lives better. How many have heard a senior citizen say "I am glad I am living now as I would not want to be the children of today who have to deal with what we are leaving behind"? Let's not be fooled by the corrupt intellectuals who preach that gun controls will fix our problems but rather re-establish values that return us to a great society. :ohdear:

Sorry, not buying it. No one is claiming that getting some measure of control and management of high capacity, designed specifically to kill people, type guns will solve the world's problems. What it might go is make it just a little harder for that tiny fraction of the population that gets a kick out of killing to get the tools they need for mass killing.
The only part of the "good old days" that I think would be welcomed back is the cooperation we saw across polirical and class boundries to get things done that needed doing.

[Normal]

Airports used to be safe too, but we had to harden the procedures and checkpoints as well as start up the TSA. Times evolve. We need to harden up the schools too.

[Taltarzac725]

Well said.
And a desire to solve practical problems by approaching it with an "anything that actual works" approach.

Parents should put trigger locks on their weapons no matter where they hide them. Kids are curious and inventive on how they can reach places. And the ammunition should also be locked up in a different place but probably close by if an intruder arrives.

And make gun safety classes mandatory for people who are new gun owners.

Sorry, not buying it. No one is claiming that getting some measure of control and management of high capacity, designed specifically to kill people, type guns will solve the world's problems. What it might go is make it just a little harder for that tiny fraction of the population that gets a kick out of killing to get the tools they need for mass killing.
The only part of the "good old days" that I think would be welcomed back is the cooperation we saw across polirical and class boundries to get things done that needed doing.

[MartinSE]

There are some of us who have lived and observed the period of destruction of our Society and the resultant Con regarding how to fixed it with a single act of change, e.g. gun control. We have seen the mental hospital's closed and the patients sent to the street., we have seen the church attendance significantly reduced, we have seen a tremendous growth in "entitlement" demands, we have seen people avoiding participation in work as they want needs given not earned, we have seen the Police and other authority groups, (e.g. teachers, etc) powers taken away, we have seen our children provided with electronic games which boast shootings, killings and the total disrespect for life, we have raised children who believe killing is a "game", we have made drugs legal or ignore their their use and effects on our lives, we have watched means of destroying total societies put in the hands of corrupt leaders, I am sure many more conditions can be identified by those who have also lived many many many years and are not fooled by the con that controlling guns will make our lives better. How many have heard a senior citizen say "I am glad I am living now as I would not want to be the children of today who have to deal with what we are leaving behind"? Let's not be fooled by the corrupt intellectuals who preach that gun controls will fix our problems but rather re-establish values that return us to a great society. :ohdear:

There are many things in your post I agree with, but the main thing I disagree with in your post is the I know if NO ONE that believes gun control will FIX the problem. It will help. A little or a lot, it will help.

Background checks won’t fix the problem but they will help.

And while we debate, children die.

What would you change today that will help the problem and save a child’s life?

[MartinSE]

Well said.
And a desire to solve practical problems by approaching it with an "anything that actual works" approach.

Parents should put trigger locks on their weapons no matter where they hide them. Kids are curious and inventive on how they can reach places. And the ammunition should also be locked up in a different place but probably close by if an intruder arrives.

And make gun safety classes mandatory for people who are new gun owners.

Agreed