School Shooting Newtown CT

[ZTAngel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not much of an article really, just a BS emotional appeal from someone who was shot by a total sociopath. Of course there's not one single thing he proposed which would have prevented that crazy SOB from walking up that driveway and shooting him and his wife and his friend.

I hate that we're all still seriously talking about this "need" of reform. We don't need to do jack squat. At least not immediately. Laws made directly in the wake of emotional events typically aren't well thought out or even needed.

These types of shootings are becoming more rare, not more common and saying that the NRA has blood on its hands is just silly.

So, basically, you're saying let's not do anything at all to at least try to prevent these types of things from happening? I know you always like to play devil's advocate, but I think you're being completely abrasive and insensitive. What happened on Friday is a huge tragedy....probably bigger than anything we've seen in years in that 20 innocent children are being loaded into tiny little coffins. Luckily, it seems the majority of people disagree with you. Politicians who once received high ratings from the NRA are coming around to the idea of serious reform. Will it prevent these instances from happening every single time? No. But it hopefully will make it a little more difficult for a maniac to commit this type of crime. I don't understand how anyone could advocate not doing anything at all just because it won't prevent every instance.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ZTAngel

So, basically, you're saying let's not do anything at all to at least try to prevent these types of things from happening? I know you always like to play devil's advocate, but I think you're being completely abrasive and insensitive.

You should look at my location indicator and know that I have some personal experience in this area. I drive by the OKC bombing memorial several times a day, office 3-4 blocks as the crow flies from there and actually heard and felt that blast, not to mention knowing some of the victims. My heart goes out to the victims of this tragedy, but I'm not going to support emotional legislation because that's what some think is apparently the sensitive and non-abrasive thing to do. For the record, I think the rulemaking going on right now with regard to ammonium nitrate sales is ridiculous.

What happened on Friday is a huge tragedy....probably bigger than anything we've seen in years in that 20 innocent children are being loaded into tiny little coffins. Luckily, it seems the majority of people disagree with you. Politicians who once received high ratings from the NRA are coming around to the idea of serious reform.

Define "serious" reform. In my memory, every reform we've had over recent years has been an expansion of gun rights and every "serious" reform as noted by MC, was worked around by the gun industry so quickly that its effect was negligible.

Will it prevent these instances from happening every single time? No. But it hopefully will make it a little more difficult for a maniac to commit this type of crime. I don't understand how anyone could advocate not doing anything at all just because it won't prevent every instance.

Okay, let's look at this case, what law would prevent someone from stealing weapons from their mother who lawfully possessed those weapons? The SOB broke multiple laws doing what he did. That really didn't seem to matter much to him.

In reality, any sort of restrictions are going to make it harder on that family in some rural Oklahoma county from being able to defend itself when someone is trying to break in through the back door at 3 in the morning.

[SydneyK]

I'll readily admit that I'm not very well-versed in all things gun related, so this may be a silly question...

I thought I heard something on the news about Adam attempting to purchase a gun, but being denied. When that happens, is there any kind of communication required to take place between the gun store and some kind of officials? I mean, if a guy attempts to buy a gun and is denied, does the store notify local police of the attempted purchase?

[ZTAngel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

You should look at my location indicator and know that I have some personal experience in this area. I drive by the OKC bombing memorial several times a day, office 3-4 blocks as the crow flies from there and actually heard and felt that blast, not to mention knowing some of the victims. My heart goes out to the victims of this tragedy, but I'm not going to support emotional legislation because that's what some think is apparently the sensitive and non-abrasive thing to do. For the record, I think the rulemaking going on right now with regard to ammonium nitrate sales is ridiculous.

I don't deny that you have sympathy for the OKC victims, but saying you have "personal experience" as to how Newtown people feel just because you're from OK is a poor example. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but the way you worded it really rubbed me the wrong way. It's like my friends from Florida (or me since I'm from FL) saying stuff like, "Oh, I'm from Florida so I know how the victims of Hurricane Sandy or Katrina feel." No. Their homes were never destroyed, their loved ones never died. Just because they've been through a hurricane or two doesn't mean that they have "personal experience" in that area.

Define "serious" reform. In my memory, every reform we've had over recent years has been an expansion of gun rights and every "serious" reform as noted by MC, was worked around by the gun industry so quickly that its effect was negligible.

So we shouldn't at least attempt to discuss anything because we've failed in the past?

Okay, let's look at this case, what law would prevent someone from stealing weapons from their mother who lawfully possessed those weapons? The SOB broke multiple laws doing what he did. That really didn't seem to matter much to him.

In reality, any sort of restrictions are going to make it harder on that family in some rural Oklahoma county from being able to defend itself when someone is trying to break in through the back door at 3 in the morning.

As I said before, any kind of reform won't prevent every single crime from occurring. Let's say we enact reform that limited the amount of firearms a single person could purchase in a year. Or limited the amount of rounds of ammunition the firearm can hold. Or some kind of mental health act was enacted. Right there we may have prevented VA Tech, Aurora and Tucson. May have being the keywords. I'm not saying it would have prevented it, but I don't see why we don't at least try. We owe it to the victims and their families to at least try to keep this from happening instead of throwing up our hands and saying, "Welp, we've never been successful in the past so let's just do nothing at all."

I have a child who is not much younger than those little children who died on Friday. I'm passionate about this because I see him in this tragedy...and it's scary.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

I'll readily admit that I'm not very well-versed in all things gun related, so this may be a silly question...

I thought I heard something on the news about Adam attempting to purchase a gun, but being denied. When that happens, is there any kind of communication required to take place between the gun store and some kind of officials? I mean, if a guy attempts to buy a gun and is denied, does the store notify local police of the attempted purchase?

Yes the FBI and ATF have access to the application records of anyone attempting to purchase a firearm in this country. As far as I know there is two week waiting period in CT to purchase a firearm. That is so the background check and application to purchase a firearm can be processed. This douche shouldn't have been able to buy a firearm because he was only 20 BUT he tried to purchase it with his older brothers ID. There's not much reporting on why he was denied on the spot.. maybe the store owner realized he was using a fake ID or the guy seemed "off".

I don't think we should arm teachers but I don't see why more school districts don't have their own uniformed police force or at least one or two armed guards patrolling the grounds. Funding shouldn't be an issue either; If we can pull $10 billion dollars out of our ass to buy fighter jets for Egypt and Libya we should be able to afford security to our own citizens.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ZTAngel

I don't deny that you have sympathy for the OKC victims, but saying you have "personal experience" as to how Newtown people feel just because you're from OK is a poor example. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but the way you worded it really rubbed me the wrong way. It's like my friends from Florida (or me since I'm from FL) saying stuff like, "Oh, I'm from Florida so I know how the victims of Hurricane Sandy or Katrina feel." No. Their homes were never destroyed, their loved ones never died. Just because they've been through a hurricane or two doesn't mean that they have "personal experience" in that area.

I heard the blast, felt the blast, knew victims, my father was in a courtroom in which the windows imploded into the courtroom. Our community lost the children in the daycare, so empathy. I don't really care how you feel about what I'm saying, (lack of empathy) my point is that empathy is a dumb reason to write laws which are really solutions in search of problems.

As I said before, any kind of reform won't prevent every single crime from occurring. Let's say we enact reform that limited the amount of firearms a single person could purchase in a year. Or limited the amount of rounds of ammunition the firearm can hold. Or some kind of mental health act was enacted. Right there we may have prevented VA Tech, Aurora and Tucson. May have being the keywords. I'm not saying it would have prevented it, but I don't see why we don't at least try. We owe it to the victims and their families to at least try to keep this from happening instead of throwing up our hands and saying, "Welp, we've never been successful in the past so let's just do nothing at all."

I have a child who is not much younger than those little children who died on Friday. I'm passionate about this because I see him in this tragedy...and it's scary.

His chances of being struck by lightening or killed by a shark are exponentially higher than being shot at grade school. Creating strict new laws in response to this is like trying to swat a fly with an H-bomb.

[ZTAngel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

His chances of being struck by lightening or killed by a shark are exponentially higher than being shot at grade school. Creating strict new laws in response to this is like trying to swat a fly with an H-bomb.

Ok. I'm done with you.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ZTAngel

Ok. I'm done with you.

For the love of Christ, having children does not give you magical insight here. In fact, it makes you a lot less objective about things. You're obviously very emotionally connected to this tragedy, so maybe, perhaps, you're not in the best place to be calling for changing the rules for everyone else. This year, there were 40 killings overall, which is probably an aberration considering last year there were 8.

Something which affects 8 to 40 out of 300 million people is not a good reason to spend billions on heightened security, regulations, etc. Especially when our previous experience is that none of those things help.

Heck, this school had just substantially upgraded its security. Would you suggest that this single incident is a reason to have metal detectors and security guards and bulletproof doors at every elementary school in the U.S.?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I don't really care how you feel about what I'm saying, (lack of empathy) my point is that empathy is a dumb reason to write laws which are really solutions in search of problems.

This, I think, is where the rub comes in. I'll absolutely agree that empathy and sympathy are not the reasons to write laws.

But I don't think anyone is in search of a problem. There is without question a problem, and it is not in the least off the mark to discuss what can reasonably be done to make it less of a problem.

Not every suggestion will be reasonable. Not every suggestion will be feasible. Not every suggestion will be effective. That's no reason not to have the discussion.

[AOII Angel]

Kevin, the problem with your statistics is that they only take into account school violence, but most of the mass shootings this year and last have not been at schools but at malls, homes, places of worship and other non-school related locals.

[AGDee]

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder has vetoed the bill the Michigan legislature passed in the middle of the night (Thursday night/Friday morning) before their last session of the year. The bill specifically allowed concealed carry in day cares, schools and churches. It had been passed just hours before the Sandy Hook shooting.

[ZTAngel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

For the love of Christ, having children does not give you magical insight here.

Never said it did. My problem is that you can't seem to make a point without coming off as a condescending douche. See above as an example. Hence, I was done.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

But I don't think anyone is in search of a problem. There is without question a problem, and it is not in the least off the mark to discuss what can reasonably be done to make it less of a problem.

Exactly.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

I don't need hunting rifles. I rarely shoot a rifle. I don't hunt. I can go to a store if I need food. When I do shoot a rifle it is an MSR, Modern Sporting Rifle. Some call it an assault rifle, even if it isn't. They are popular for hunting. Down in Texas an MSR in .458 SOCOM or .500 Beowolf is the popular choice for hunting deadly wild hogs.

FYP. I actually know people who are poor enough that if they want to eat meat, they have to put it on the table themselves. Yes the start-up cost is more, buying the weapon especially, but once you do, it's cheaper on a pound for pound basis to eat game, especially if you do your own butchering. Granted these type of people aren't the norm, and most people who hunt do it purely for sport. But sustenance hunting is not yet completely gone in the US, especially in Rural areas.

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

I don't carry to feel like a badass. I carry to feel safe. I have found myself in bad situations. I grew up differently. I was a target at age five and grew up having to be careful so was trained in firearms use beginning at age six.

I do not know your situation so I won't comment on it specifically, but many people who carry a firearm for defense have no substantial chance that they will be in a life or death situation that requires a firearm.

Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG

The right to bear arms is not over stated. There are very specific reasons why the Second Amendment was written and fireamrs like the military uses are actually the specific firearms intended to be protected.
In U.S. v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court stated that, "The Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense . . . [and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

And here is where things get tricky. First off, the Bill of Rights was written to restrict the power of the federal government, not the state governments. Second it is argueable that the right to keep and bear arms is restricted to what is need to maintain a militia. Discussion of the Second Amendment is difficult because a militia in the sense that it existed in the several states before federation does not exist any more. Keeping that in mind, there have been legal opinions issued stating that the right to keep and bear arms only applies to military duties as part of the militia.

[DubaiSis]

Here's my 2 cents:
1-any gun for private ownership should have to be reloaded after 6 shots.
2-a person should only be able to buy a limited amount of ammo at one time. Yes, they could stock pile it, but that would mean they'd have time to think if this plan is really a good one, and maybe reconsider. If you have to take out 9 boxes of ammo to go hunting, you might want to try lessons before hunting again.
3-any idea that legislating for slight (lightning strike) situations is ridiculous. Airplanes are legislated at every stage and upon every accident. 1 failed shoe bomb equals you have to take off your shoes for every flight (stolen from interweb, but it's true). Children killed while at school is WAY more common than bombs on airplanes and yet anyone who travels knows how many crazy steps we have to go through because of a lightning strike threat.
4-being sympathetic about one civil tragedy doesn't let you off the hook of the rest. The OKC bombing was a terrible thing. Lucky for you it didn't involve guns so you don't have to feel bad about anybody else being a victim of gun violence.
5-mental healthcare reform has to be an element of the change that needs to happen in our society. Reagan's biggest legacy is when he dismantled the mental health institutions because apparently people enjoyed living in nuthouses and took advantage.
6-teaching civility and conflict resolution has to be another thing changed in our society. Would it solve anything? No. Would it help? I believe it would.

[DGTess]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

Here's my 2 cents:
1-any gun for private ownership should have to be reloaded after 6 shots.

I imagine the two armed robbers breaking in to my house at 0300 would agree. Or the team of 3 who rob my bank while I'm in line. Would they limit themselves?

2-a person should only be able to buy a limited amount of ammo at one time. Yes, they could stock pile it, but that would mean they'd have time to think if this plan is really a good one, and maybe reconsider. If you have to take out 9 boxes of ammo to go hunting, you might want to try lessons before hunting again.

Can you explain how one would practice? It's difficult enough to practice with "range ammo" (ball, full metal jacket, for health reasons at indoor ranges) and know that the self-defense ammo one carries (ball ammo is more dangerous as it is more likely to go through the target and cause additional damages) shoots differently.

I regularly shoot 150-300 rounds at the range. That's how I know I could hit what I must, when I must.

3-any idea that legislating for slight (lightning strike) situations is ridiculous. Airplanes are legislated at every stage and upon every accident. 1 failed shoe bomb equals you have to take off your shoes for every flight (stolen from interweb, but it's true). Children killed while at school is WAY more common than bombs on airplanes and yet anyone who travels knows how many crazy steps we have to go through because of a lightning strike threat.

Bringing in TSA procedures hardly helps anyone's argument. An example of another government bureaucracy four times as large as it needs to be to provide the essential (debatable, but that's another post) service.

4-being sympathetic about one civil tragedy doesn't let you off the hook of the rest. The OKC bombing was a terrible thing. Lucky for you it didn't involve guns so you don't have to feel bad about anybody else being a victim of gun violence.

The worst school incident -- a bombing in Bath Township, MI, in 1927 -- didn't involve guns. It, too, killed elementary-school children.

5-mental healthcare reform has to be an element of the change that needs to happen in our society. Reagan's biggest legacy is when he dismantled the mental health institutions because apparently people enjoyed living in nuthouses and took advantage.
6-teaching civility and conflict resolution has to be another thing changed in our society. Would it solve anything? No. Would it help? I believe it would.

Conflict resolution, yes. But also individual responsibility.

And reality. One cannot go through life believing one is just as good as the next guy at everything. Self-esteem is important, but everyone has strengths and weaknesses; those who never learn that never learn interdependence and often build resentments against those who excel at something.