[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Trish Crocker

From what I have heard, unless you are a 'hothead' the average person will hesitate before pulling a trigger, even if they feel threatened. It is during this moment of hesitation that the assailant gets the upper hand. The common statement that criminals will find a way to get a weapon may be true, but a scarcity of weapons would drive up the price, therefore not every nut would be able to afford one. I'm not sure I can accept the idea that some form of gun control is contrary to the Constitution. I don't think the founding fathers were talking about assault weapons and arsenals. At the time the constitution was written, there were no phones to call for help when you found someone lurking around your property, many people live miles from any town or city and needed protection. In this case, the only viable solution would be to arm yourselves. It seems to me that the same constitution that allows this 'freedom' is the constitution that denied women the right to vote and was then changed when people realized the stupidity of the this law. We have the right to seek change when it is causing harm to United States Citizens.

Very reasonable post Trish!

[Down Sized]

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

I'm stunned that my mind, my logic, and my life experience is so different from that of the spokesmen of the NRA.

Their promised first "meaningful contribution" to the nation's response to Sandy Hook is to support arming more people with more guns.

How is it possible to conclude this when there are two unchanged axioms throughout human history:

1) The more weapons man possesses, the more violence and death occurs.

2) The more sophisticated and deadly weapons are, the more serious injuries and death occur.

Someone has to refute these two realities before I will begin to question my sanity, but again, I'm astounded that there is such a divergence of opinion on this.

Oh! The first of my kids is arriving! Merry Christmas everyone!

Makes more sense than to let more psychos and drug crazed nuts out on the streets running loose. Da.

[ugotme]

Originally Posted by blueash

And PERHAPS that gunman would have quickly dispatched the teacher or mall cop in the hallway and now has another weapon and more bullets for his/her killing spree. You see PERHAPS works both ways, perhaps. But it defies logic to have gun totin' teachers as your line of defense against the repetition of last Friday. It IMO is also important they we don't try to find a solution to this one episode and not look at the bigger picture of gun deaths in America. Avoid the kind of simplistic cure that taking off our shoes would make air flight safe because of one use of shoes to bring down a plane.

IF you read my post I said that I did not really agree with the NRA and yes, perhaps works both ways. The main point is that there simply are no easy answers.

Unfortunately no matter what you do some moron will always find a way to cause harm to other people.

When a CONVICTED killer is sent to prison for "25 to life" he is often let out much earlier. WHY? Should it not mean at least 25 years?

Sorry - getting off track here. Mea culpa

[ugotme]

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

The answers are as simple as always. They are in the original post. Reduce the number and deadly potential of weapons and regulate their availability to the general public. The amount and severity of violence will AUTOMATICALLY be reduced. Sure there are many other things which might help, but what could be more sensible than uniform gun control?

Not so!

Most guns are regulated already - note I did not say ALL! The criminal or mentally incompetent does not get a gun legally. Most are stolen.

As I have stated in other posts - go ahead add another 100 - 200 gun laws. do you REALLY think the criminals - repeat CRIMINALS - will obey them?

Use a gun in the commission of a crime - automatic jail time - no ifs, ands or buts.

[Mr Hanky]

I really do think the only thing that could of saved lives in that school would have been another gun!
One teacher,office worker,janitor or even a visitor to the school legally carrying could of stopped that sick kid in his tracks. And I doubt there would of been any hesitation in doing so. Some perished while trying to disarm him.
Some need to understand that personnel carry weapons are not tools of death ,they are
carried to help protect and preserve life.

[graciegirl]

I don't think what I said really will change things so I deleted it. There isn't any use arguing.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Mr Hanky

I really do think the only thing that could of saved lives in that school would have been another gun!
One teacher,office worker,janitor or even a visitor to the school legally carrying could of stopped that sick kid in his tracks. And I doubt there would of been any hesitation in doing so. Some perished while trying to disarm him.
Some need to understand that personnel carry weapons are not tools of death ,they are
carried to help protect and preserve life.

I understand this school of thought, but in my opinion it is way too simplistic. A teacher, office worker, janitor could have had a weapon, but would they have been in a position to stop the perp, before he entered the classroom and opened fire? At what point would one recognize what was going on and be able to take action? Would the armed person be trained in how to intervene to not only stop the perpetrator, but to assure the safety of the children? What if the armed "good guy", misread the situation and saw a threat when none actually existed, starting a firefight with an innocent unarmed person? And, most alarming to me, what would be the result of a firefight between someone with an automatic weapon, and the armed school person with hundreds of children in the same building? Now if the armed school employee saw the perp enter the building, instantly recognized he was armed and had mayhem on his mind, and either disarmed or killed him, I would say that was a positive outcome. However I can see so many inherent problems in having armed people in schools, including the possibility of these people going off and killing children themselves, that I think that would have to be thought through carefully. The "code of the west" didn't work so well in the 1800s and I can't believe that most of us want a country with people walking around everywhere with their fingers on a trigger. I have read in several places that there were two armed security people at Columbine High, and that was obviously not a deterrent in that tragedy.

[ijusluvit]

Originally Posted by ugotme

Not so!

Most guns are regulated already - note I did not say ALL! The criminal or mentally incompetent does not get a gun legally. Most are stolen.

As I have stated in other posts - go ahead add another 100 - 200 gun laws. do you REALLY think the criminals - repeat CRIMINALS - will obey them?

Use a gun in the commission of a crime - automatic jail time - no ifs, ands or buts.

With all due respect, you are not addressing my point. Can you name a single mass murderer in recent times who was a CRIMINAL prior to their rampage? These awful events are the best proof of the fact that if powerful weapons are not generally available, fewer unstable, previously anonymous persons will be able to get them.

And to go further, by simple math, if fewer powerful weapons are available, fewer CRIMINALS will have them.

I'm not talking about 'solving' this horrible social problem today, or even soon. I'm talking about taking a major foolproof, beginning step.

[MelZ]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

"The only way to combat a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a gun".

So it sounds as though the NRA is advocating a gunfight at the OK Corral solution to gun violence. They believe teachers and administrators should be armed. Now think about it - a madman with assault weapons enters a classroom. By the time the teacher recognizes a threat and pulls a weapon out of their desk, or wherever, the madman has already mowed down a half dozen children, including, perhaps the armed teacher. If the teacher avoids being killed in the initial volley, he/she and the madman engage in an old fashioned gunfight in a crowded classroom. Yep, that will solve all our problems! The LEADERSHIP of the NRA is out of touch with the members of their own organization, and in another world from the rest of America. Good grief!

Now think about it a madman with 2 gallons of gasoline sets fire to a school, so we ban gasoline?

[graciegirl]

I don't think what I said really will change things so I deleted it. There isn't any use arguing.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I don't know what the answer is, but we have more gun laws and gun control now than at any time in our history and gun violence is worse now than it has ever been.
I'm not saying that there is a correlation between the two, but #1, there might be and #2 all of those laws and regulations have not helped. Why would anyone think that more laws and regulations are going to work?

[wendyquat]

Originally Posted by MelZ

Now think about it a madman with 2 gallons of gasoline sets fire to a school, so we ban gasoline?

Or a drunk driver kills a family with his car? Lets ban cars!

Seems I remember they tried banning alcohol and that didn't stop a lot of folks from drinking!

Guns do NOT kill people, people kill people! Treat the sick people and quit letting them roam our streets! One mother of a 13 year old boy that she could not handle begged police for help after he threatened her many times. They told her they could not help her until he had committed a crime! Some changes need to be made.

When you OUTLAW guns, only OUTLAWS will have guns!

[LndLocked]

Originally Posted by Mr Hanky

I really do think the only thing that could of saved lives in that school would have been another gun!
One teacher,office worker,janitor or even a visitor to the school legally carrying could of stopped that sick kid in his tracks. And I doubt there would of been any hesitation in doing so. Some perished while trying to disarm him.
Some need to understand that personnel carry weapons are not tools of death ,they are
carried to help protect and preserve life.

Guess what high school had an armed guard? ..... Columbine.

Va Tech (just like every major college) has a full on armed Police force.

[Monkei]

Originally Posted by ugotme

Not totally agreeing with the NRA nor with you!
The point (which, of course, no one can guarantee) is that if a teacher had a gun and was trained in its use - perhaps - PERHAPS the gunmen could have been stopped. If the madman had killed a half dozen maybe the others would have been spared.

Obviously no one knows.

There are NO easy answers!

Or the more likely result would have been she would never have the time to get to the gun because for safety reasons it was on triple lockdown to prevent its use by the students in the school.

A ban is a good place to start. A ban is why crazys can't get a ground to air missile weapon. A weapon designed to kill only people and no other reason should remain out of the publics hands.

A ban is not the whole answer but I continue to ask the question if we don't take steps NOW what will the situation be in 2025?

The NRA does not represent gun owners like myself who has a hunting rifle and a small handgun, they represent the BUSINESS of gun manufacturers.

[Monkei]

Originally Posted by wendyquat

Or a drunk driver kills a family with his car? Lets ban cars!

Seems I remember they tried banning alcohol and that didn't stop a lot of folks from drinking!

Guns do NOT kill people, people kill people! Treat the sick people and quit letting them roam our streets! One mother of a 13 year old boy that she could not handle begged police for help after he threatened her many times. They told her they could not help her until he had committed a crime! Some changes need to be made.

When you OUTLAW guns, only OUTLAWS will have guns!

So what are you saying? Are you agreeing with the NRA that there is a place in society for assault weapons whose only job is to kill a lot of people in a short amount of time.

By all means lets lift bans on all weapons then. Surely we could all use a tank or too then we could all hear more fancy NRA slogans like tanks don't kill people, people kill people.