Roark Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I think that we can expect to see some sort of federal legislation regarding this topic be proposed in the near future. After reading many comments from national news outlets I'm wondering what everyone's reaction is. Does the US need new gun control measures? Link to comment
husker_99 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I think that we can expect to see some sort of federal legislation regarding this topic be proposed in the near future. After reading many comments from national news outlets I'm wondering what everyone's reaction is. Does the US need new gun control measures? HELL NO! we don't need to pass new laws after every little incident. Link to comment
strigori Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 This has jack and S to do with gun control. This has more to do with the state of mental health care in this country, and the radical far rightwing. Shooter's mom was a 'survivalist' and homeschooled the kid for a couple years. 2 points that exist in almost every mass killer (serial or spree) 1 - Deep religious background. 2 - Issues with women, often in relation to point #1. The gun was the tool of choice. Nothing more. And the guns used were hand guns. Not assault rifles. 3 Link to comment
huskerenner Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Three people were attacked and set on fire in Colorado earlier this week.Do we need to outlaw matches,also? Link to comment
strigori Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 20 some kids at a Chinese school were attacked with a knife. There have been several heinous murders committed with hammers. Link to comment
beanman Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 This has jack and S to do with gun control. This has more to do with the state of mental health care in this country, and the radical far rightwing. Shooter's mom was a 'survivalist' and homeschooled the kid for a couple years. 2 points that exist in almost every mass killer (serial or spree) 1 - Deep religious background. 2 - Issues with women, often in relation to point #1. The gun was the tool of choice. Nothing more. And the guns used were hand guns. Not assault rifles. Not saying you're wrong, but I'd like to see you cite your sources on this one. Seems like this guy had a lot of other issues other than a deep religious background. Link to comment
beanman Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 20 some kids at a Chinese school were attacked with a knife. There have been several heinous murders committed with hammers. None of those kids died. Never seen someone kill 28 people in less than 10 minutes with a hammer. Link to comment
NUance Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 I'd be in favor of gun control if I trusted the gov't. But I don't. Pretty soon private gun ownership would be a thing of the past. Link to comment
beanman Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 I'd be in favor of gun control if I trusted the gov't. But I don't. Pretty soon private gun ownership would be a thing of the past. I really don't think it would ever come to that. Link to comment
308_Husker Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Remember, gun control keeps guns out of the hands of honest people, too. Link to comment
It'sNotAFakeID Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Dont get rid of the guns. In fact allow concealed carry, but change the background checks. 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 The gun was the tool of choice. Nothing more. This point is never a good one. If a knife had been the tool of choice, one or two people would have died, max. 2 Link to comment
beanman Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 The gun was the tool of choice. Nothing more. This point is never a good one. If a knife had been the tool of choice, one or two people would have died, max. Yup. Link to comment
308_Husker Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 So, from what I've read/watched from various new sites (if they can be trusted anymore) I have come up with the following "facts": 1. The shooting occurred in a "Gun Free Zone" 2. The precious minutes that it took the police to get there resulted in him being able to harm others. 3. This happened in a state that already has one of the highest restrictions placed upon firearms. 4. It happened with stolen weapons. They were not his. 5. The murderer exhibited extreme antisocial behavior and had a hatred for his mother. 6. Violent crime is at an all time low and gun ownership has increased dramatically. It's interesting to note that during the years in which Washington D.C. passed a handgun ban and trigger lock law, the murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law. While the US murder rate averaged 11% lower the average. http://www.justfacts.../guncontrol.asp I fail to see how stricter gun laws would have prohibited this from happening. There is a market for everything. The only thing gun control will do is keep the guns in the hands of people who want to commit violent crimes with firearms while keeping them out of the hands of the honest American who understands the responsibility of owning and operating a firearm. Guns become a target because they're something concrete and tangible that the news outlets can use to direct Americans' blame. It's much harder to point the fingers to something intangible like a mental illness,which requires thought and intelligence to solve. Instead, we get the finger pointing in the easiest and dumbest way possible. Guns have been around since elementary schools have been around. 60 years ago, I'm not aware of any shooting such as this ever occurring. Have guns changed, or have people changed? 1 Link to comment
teachercd Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Wow, well, the day that people understand, NOT think they understand, the Second Amendment, will be an amazing day. Link to comment
Recommended Posts