Gun control...

[midtnvol]

a 6 yr period (less than 20/yr) out weighs the over 2 million gun owners who prevented a crime against themselves just last year?  

The statement was "Show me an example of where a person with a legal carry permit has committed a crime or done what you are claiming could happen." And that is what Quasi did 117 times. My point is that SOMETHING must be done to slow this trend of gun violence. As I have stated I am big on second rights amendments, but 20 defenseless children dead is unacceptable. What is wrong with background checks at gun shows and waiting periods for even law abiding citizens so they don't knee jerk react to some assumed wrong done them? Even if only one life is saved, isn't it worth it? I checked out Quasi's links but I'm not sure where the 2 million # comes from. I do not doubt you, but I would like to see the link so I can evaluate the context of the article.
 
edit: How would any of the of the proposals presented prevent someone from defending themselves? I haven't seen any that say citizens can't purchase and possess guns. All I've seen is limiting size of clips, and background checks at gun shows.

[VOLMAN]

I'm all for background checks at gun shows, no problem with it. I do not support the mag limit portion as this will not save any lives and will eventually lead to no detachable mag's. There are many laws being proposed to ban AR's etc. as was warned would happen but many said "no one is looking to take your guns". Oregon or Wash St. one has proposed mandatory once/yr in home visits from police to verify compliance with proposed gun laws. It's a very slippery slope. It has been demonstrated time and time again that laws such as those proposed have no statistically significant impact on gun violence (this is why the Brady ban, enacted for something like 16 yrs, was rescinded and this is precisely what they are proposing again). Since criminals will not obey gun laws, the only logical way to achieve what the left is pushing for (i.e. safety from all gun violence) is to confiscate and outlaw gun ownership and this is where they would take us. Even one child dying is horrible, but gun laws will not stop it. 

[midtnvol]

I don't argue that the Brady Bill was effective but mostly unenforced (lack of prosecution mostly) but I ran across this today. http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/06/17213303-fewer-gun-deaths-in-states-with-most-gun-laws-study-finds?lite

[VOLMAN]

depends on the criteria used and methods employed. I don't need a study to tell me what I can discern myself....criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. What afflicts America is not lack of gun laws, it is a lack of morals that would dictate a respect for life and respect for others. People get angry for the most insignificant of reasons and are instantly ready to kill someone in order to alleviate an inconvenience or to administer retribution for a perceived offense. A gun in the hand of a good law abiding citizen, who respects the gun and understands how to safely handle the gun is a threat to no one. A person who has no respect for life or others is a threat to everyone whether they have a gun or not, they will find a tool that will allow them to rape, rob and kill.   

[midtnvol]

depends on the criteria used and methods employed. I don't need a study to tell me what I can discern myself....criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. What afflicts America is not lack of gun laws, it is a lack of morals that would dictate a respect for life and respect for others. People get angry for the most insignificant of reasons and are instantly ready to kill someone in order to alleviate an inconvenience or to administer retribution for a perceived offense. A gun in the hand of a good law abiding citizen, who respects the gun and understands how to safely handle the gun is a threat to no one. A person who has no respect for life or others is a threat to everyone whether they have a gun or not, they will find a tool that will allow them to rape, rob and kill.    

Agree that both sides can take the same numbers and spin them to meet their own ends. I think we mostly agree on ownership of guns, and the lack of respect for others in our society is demonstrated.

[Creek Walker]

Would someone please explain to me how limits on magazine capacity would have prevented Sandy Hook?

Would someone explain to me how a waiting period for gun purchases would have prevented Sandy Hook?

Everyone wants to say that 20 dead children is inexcusable and then launch into a litany of gun changes that we should adopt that would have done NOTHING to stop that act of cowardly violence.

I saw the statement that we must do something to curb gun violence in this country, as if it is out of control. Look at the crime stats. Our rate of gun violence is already being reduced. Specifically, the homicide rate for rifles (which includes assault rifles as well as "ordinary" rifles) is down 15 percent in five years. Is it still way too high? Yes. But there is only so much that laws can do. Britain has ridiculous gun laws and their violent crime rate is extremely high -- way higher than the violent crime rate here in the U.S.

Again, focus on the cause, not the means.

[midtnvol]

Would someone explain to me how a waiting period for gun purchases would have prevented Sandy Hook?

It's also called a cooling off period. It's a chance to give someone who is really pissed off an opportunity to calm down. Sandy Hook ws not a sudden urge to gun down a bunch of innocents but a planned cowardly act carried out by an insane monster. No one said it would prevent a specific incident but there is a chance it might stop one or more sometime. Asking one to prove it stopped something that didn't happen is impossible, so we have to rely on common sense and a little foresight to anticipate. Is the NRA's proposal to put armed guards in every school an iron clad cure for gun violence on campuses? There are armed campus policemen at practically every college nationwide and it still happens. I have mentioned waiting periods and background checks but I will go even further and say mandatory gun safety classes before being allowed to purchase weapons. I know not many here will agree to that but I think it's time to act with a reasonable approach. Also put some teeth in the law by prosecuting violators. The status quo is not working .

[Creek Walker]

Would someone explain to me how a waiting period for gun purchases would have prevented Sandy Hook?

It's also called a cooling off period. It's a chance to give someone who is really pissed off an opportunity to calm down. Sandy Hook ws not a sudden urge to gun down a bunch of innocents but a planned cowardly act carried out by an insane monster. No one said it would prevent a specific incident but there is a chance it might stop one or more sometime. Asking one to prove it stopped something that didn't happen is impossible, so we have to rely on common sense and a little foresight to anticipate. Is the NRA's proposal to put armed guards in every school an iron clad cure for gun violence on campuses? There are armed campus policemen at practically every college nationwide and it still happens. I have mentioned waiting periods and background checks but I will go even further and say mandatory gun safety classes before being allowed to purchase weapons. I know not many here will agree to that but I think it's time to act with a reasonable approach. Also put some teeth in the law by prosecuting violators. The status quo is not working .

You're the one who brought up Sandy Hook. You can't bring up Sandy Hook and use it to play on people's emotions for gun control support then back away from it and say that it doesn't apply to the argument. Either it does or it doesn't.

A mandatory waiting period for gun purchases is nothing but a hindrance to law-abiding gun owners. I think you're going to have a difficult time finding many instances of someone who went out and purchased a gun in a fit of rage and immediately used it to kill someone. Especially with these mass murders, they're often planned out over a period of many days and usually weeks or months.

Comparing the proposal for law enforcement in schools to colleges is an apples-oranges comparison. College campuses are almost always many times larger than high school or elementary school campuses, and their police departments are understaffed. College PDs aren't really there to provide student security so much as they're there to write parking tickets, investigate robberies and things like that. Would an armed guard inside every school stop every single nutjob who carries a gun into a school? No. But it would sure as heck stop some of them. Probably most of them, even. To me it is a common sense proposal. Everywhere you look nowadays there are armed security guards...except our public schools. It just doesn't make sense.

Fortunately, mandatory gun safety classes for gun purchases is such a far-out idea that it isn't going to happen.

[midtnvol]

Fortunately, mandatory gun safety classes for gun purchases is such a far-out idea that it isn't going to happen. Why? You give no reason. Did you take a drivers test before you got your license to drive a car? You have to take hunters safety classes before you can use a gun to hunt. I would like to think that anyone who possesses a firearm has some notion of how and when to use it.

[Creek Walker]

Fortunately, mandatory gun safety classes for gun purchases is such a far-out idea that it isn't going to happen. Why? You give no reason. Did you take a drivers test before you got your license to drive a car? You have to take hunters safety classes before you can use a gun to hunt. I would like to think that anyone who possesses a firearm has some notion of how and when to use it.

I have to take a driver's test before I USE my car. There's no law that I'm aware of that says I cannot purchase a car without a DL. With the exceptions of Arizona, Vermont and Alaska (and I understand a similar move is currently underway in Utah), you have to have safety training (and a litany of other requirements) to carry a handgun...which includes the vast majority of people who are going to have a gun in public. Those who are going to break the law by using a gun to kill someone are the same ones who would violate a law saying they must have proper training before they can purchase a gun. These laws are feel-good measures that largely only serve to put unnecessary restrictions on law-abiding gun owners. Do you think that if Adam Lanza or James Holmes had gone to a gun shop to purchase a gun that they couldn't have passed a mandatory safety course? Clearly they knew how to handle a gun; they proved that. A mandatory gun safety course would not stop criminals. It just wouldn't.

Where you'll get agreement from me is the need for stricter penalties, and tougher enforcement, for firearms violations. I am on the fence in regards to tougher background check laws. I wouldn't oppose a requirement for background checks at gun shows but I can't presently support the so-called universal background check that would require all private firearms transactions to take place through a licensed dealer. Those who talk about closing the "gun show loophole" are usually really after background checks for all private transactions, since the overwhelming majority of firearms transactions at gun shows take place through a licensed dealer who is in attendance, and those require background checks already.

[midtnvol]

So you don't agree with my views to slow down gun violence. What are your suggestions?

[Creek Walker]

So you don't agree with my views to slow down gun violence. What are your suggestions?

First, it deserves to be pointed out that gun violence is already slowing. It's still at an unacceptable rate, but it's slowing. The media and gun control backers would have us believe that it's at an all-time high, which just isn't true. It's been declining for years, despite no new gun laws.

My broad, all-encompassing suggestion, as I've already mentioned, is to tackle the cause rather than the means. Once you reach a point where you're willing to take a human life, you're going to find a way to do it. Period. There are many more people killed each year by someone's bare hands or by knives than are killed with a rifle of any kind, AR-15 or not. Obviously it's not feasible to round up all the knives out there. We have to start getting serious about WHY this is happening, not HOW it is happening.

Most of these mass murderers demonstrated signs that something was amiss for a while before they finally snapped. We've got to start doing a better job of identifying the signs of these nutcases. We've got to take a look at violence in our society — movies, video games. I do not think those things are solely responsible any more than I think guns are solely responsible, but they do play a role. One of the greatest ironies of this gun debate is the fact that most Hollywood stars who glorify violence in movies and TV shows are steadfast proponents of gun control. We've got to fix our issues with morality. I don't know what the solution is there, but I think you'll find America's moral decay at the root of this entire problem. We've got to start placing more value on marriage. We need fathers to start being fathers again. Millions of kids grow up in single parent households with dads who suck or who run out, and they grow up to be perfectly normal. But many mass murderers come from broken homes.

What can we do in terms of legislation to reduce the level of violence in our society? I truly don't know. The No. 1 priority should be funding for an armed security officer in every public school in America. That won't reduce violence but it will keep our kids a little safer. What's wrong with letting teachers with concealed carry permits carry their weapons on their person at school? I'm not opposed to making them undergo even more training while doing so, but the benefits far outweigh the risks, as far as I'm concerned. I would support laws enacting tougher punishment for gun law violators, and laws that crack down on licensed gun dealers who knowingly sell firearms to prohibited persons. But the bottom line is that we've got to change our approach. We've got to get away from concentrating on the tools these guys are using and start concentrating on what drives them to do it in the first place.

[midtnvol]

I don't disagree with alot you say. I am a retired teacher and I will say this about letting teachers carry weapons. There way too many off the beam teachers (they didn't start out that way but job pressure put them there). Careful screening should be used before arming anyone. I still don't get your opposition to mandatory gun safety classes. Even if it deters one single incident by making a potential perp realize the gravity of his actions, isn't it worth it? How many acidental discharges of weapons by basic understanding could be countless.

[Creek Walker]

I don't like the "if it saves one life" argument. To that I would apply Ben Franklin's famous words about those who are willing to give up liberty for security.

One thing I do think is a good idea is offering firearms safety training in middle school or high school. The NRA and National Wild Turkey Federation has teamed up here to offer just such a program in our schools. I'm just opposed to the idea of mandating stuff like that for making purchases that are constitutionally guaranteed.

[midtnvol]

Here is an effort to stop gun violence...http://news.msn.com/us/arizona-gun-proponents-launch-free-gun-program
Not sure I like this but it might have an effect. I did notice that those that recieve shotguns must take the training.

[FLVOL]

the call for bans on weapons is coming only from those that fear them and know nothing about them. Because of someone else's fear and ignorance, you want to take away everyone else's constitutional rights?

I've carried a REAL assault rifle for more than half my life. Fully automatic ones, even true machine guns, grenade launchers, etc. Trust me when I say this, they don't kill people unless that is the users intent. I don't see why people get so worked up over them, they are great, safe weapons.

I loathe the term "assault rifle". One of the most ignorant terms ever created