Very reasonable post Trish!

Makes more sense than to let more psychos and drug crazed nuts out on the streets running loose. Da.:a040:

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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?

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!

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

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

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.

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.