Gun Control

[HuskerNationNick]

To everyone talking about giving teachers guns - come on. Be realistic. Anyone wanting to give elementary school teachers guns two weeks ago would be ridiculed beyond belief. If a large high school wants to have a couple of armed guards or what-have-you, fine. But the "lets give every teacher a .9mm that'll solve everything" logic is seriously misguided. YOU ARE WILLINGLY BRINGING A GUN INTO A SCHOOL. Teachers can also be crazy, and kids know how to get access to things they shouldn't have access to. (Do you guys remember high school at all?) It is a pretty silly idea.

 

I agree, I don't think teachers should be allowed to have guns.

 

The only problem I have about outlawing semi automatic rifles, is the criminal can always get one still. Even if its illegal. Majority of your crimes homicides are done with a handguns, followed by knives, hands/fist and other weapons, rather than a rifle.

 

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

[carlfense]

The only problem I have about outlawing semi automatic rifles, is the criminal can always get one still. Even if its illegal.

Which is why we shouldn't have any laws . . . because criminals will break them anyways.

[HuskerNationNick]

VT had an armed guard? Columbine? Sandy Hook? Which one?

 

You sit here and tell me I don't know much about the topic, but all your doing is questioning what I am saying, rather than having proven statements of your own. Do you know much about this topic at all?

 

I have no problem admitting I am wrong about something. I am not going to say I am wrong about something just because you say its wrong. Show me evidence.

Let me lay this out there for you as bluntly as I can:

 

If you are trying to contribute to an informed and intelligent discussion about possible options for reducing school shootings . . . specifically arguing for armed guards in schools . . . and you don't even know that there was an armed guard at Columbine . . . well . . . it's possible that you should spend more time reading and less time opining.

 

 

 

(Even worse than that . . . two out of the three that you just listed in this post had armed guards. )

 

Ok, Columbine had armed guards. I was wrong about that.

 

Back to my original opinion, having military personnel there or officers/vets, were any of these "guards" specially trained for combat training? I did clearly state that the people who would take these positions would be qualified and have to pass a background test.

[tschu]

To everyone talking about giving teachers guns - come on. Be realistic. Anyone wanting to give elementary school teachers guns two weeks ago would be ridiculed beyond belief. If a large high school wants to have a couple of armed guards or what-have-you, fine. But the "lets give every teacher a .9mm that'll solve everything" logic is seriously misguided. YOU ARE WILLINGLY BRINGING A GUN INTO A SCHOOL. Teachers can also be crazy, and kids know how to get access to things they shouldn't have access to. (Do you guys remember high school at all?) It is a pretty silly idea.

 

I agree, I don't think teachers should be allowed to have guns.

 

The only problem I have about outlawing semi automatic rifles, is the criminal can always get one still. Even if its illegal. Majority of your crimes homicides are done with a handguns, followed by knives, hands/fist and other weapons, rather than a rifle.

 

http://www.fbi.gov/a...tables/table-20

Once illegal, law enforcement can start seizing and confiscating them and they will be sparsely available. Sure, if you wanted to badly enough you could maybe find one, but it would probably cost you a lot since dealing the guns would be highly illegal as well. Even if you don't want to shoot anyone and just want to make some cash, selling illegal guns gets people in a ton of trouble. It's why you don't see any machine guns out on the streets. If making assault rifles less accessible prevents even one such incident, it's worth it.

[HuskerNationNick]

The only problem I have about outlawing semi automatic rifles, is the criminal can always get one still. Even if its illegal.

Which is why we shouldn't have any laws . . . because criminals will break them anyways.

 

I don't think banishing guns or a type of gun is the answer. Stricter laws can only prevent those who legally want to own one from getting their hands on a gun. This might be a good thing, but all these people have to do is go to the streets and get one. If someone wants one, they can get it legally, or illegally.

[HuskerNationNick]

I agree, I don't think teachers should be allowed to have guns.

 

The only problem I have about outlawing semi automatic rifles, is the criminal can always get one still. Even if its illegal. Majority of your crimes homicides are done with a handguns, followed by knives, hands/fist and other weapons, rather than a rifle.

 

http://www.fbi.gov/a...tables/table-20

Once illegal, law enforcement can start seizing and confiscating them and they will be sparsely available. Sure, if you wanted to badly enough you could maybe find one, but it would probably cost you a lot since dealing the guns would be highly illegal as well. Even if you don't want to shoot anyone and just want to make some cash, selling illegal guns gets people in a ton of trouble. It's why you don't see any machine guns out on the streets. If making assault rifles less accessible prevents even one such incident, it's worth it.

 

I see where your coming from, but I have a friend who works Border Patrol, and he said the amount of illegal weapons they seize would make the average person's jaw drop. What would make your jaw drop even more, is the percentage they are only stopping.

[carlfense]

Ok, Columbine had armed guards. I was wrong about that.

 

Back to my original opinion, having military personnel there or officers/vets, were any of these "guards" specially trained for combat training? I did clearly state that the people who would take these positions would be qualified and have to pass a background test.

Awesome.

 

Seriously . . . you can find answers if you want them. "I am sure" of that.

[carlfense]

Stricter laws can only prevent those who legally want to own one from getting their hands on a gun.

Sure. And criminalizing the possession of methamphetamine only prevents those who legally want to possess methamphetamine from getting their hands on it. So we should legalize meth.

 

If someone wants one, they can get it legally, or illegally.

Or we could lock up the people who break the law, hmmm?

[NebraskaHarry]

I'd jump into the discussion but I'm not sure Carlfense and HuskerNationNick are done going at each other... Or Carlfense going at Nick at least.

[beanman]

I've come to the conclusion that Carlfense has all the answers and that the rest of use might as well not waste our time talking about this topic anymore. On to the Daily Skin forum we go.

[rawhide]

I am sure she knows by now that the Sandy Creek shooter didn't use a "Assault weapon" ; they were "Assault Pistols".

http://www.cbsnews.c...-hook-massacre/

 

Most of the victims were shot with the Bushmaster.

 

I don't care about thumbhole stocks too much, being a lefty

I don't really care much about any of the stocks. It's purely a cosmetic issue. Black guns with pistol grips apparently look scary to people who don't know much about guns.

 

If they should be worried about anything it's magazine capacity . . . not stocks, bayonet lugs, flash suppressors, etc.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30sjtuXcvOE

the nbc clip is why I mentioned Feiny

 

A little more current information on what actually happened per officials involved with the crime scene investigation. Regardless, rifle or handgun does not bring those kids back.

 

same argument tschu; everyone should only drive 2 cylinder powered cars, nobody needs to go over 40 mph. 30k+ deaths every year on our highways, And people commit murder with cars daily. By choice.

[HuskerNationNick]

I've come to the conclusion that Carlfense has all the answers and that the rest of use might as well not waste our time talking about this topic anymore. On to the Daily Skin forum we go.

 

I am done trying to discuss it. Armed Officers/Military members wouldn't make a criminal think twice about committing a shooting I guess. Columbine has "Armed Guards" but I can't find out anywhere if they were ex-military or if they were even trained for combat.

[beanman]

I've come to the conclusion that Carlfense has all the answers and that the rest of use might as well not waste our time talking about this topic anymore. On to the Daily Skin forum we go.

 

I am done trying to discuss it. Armed Officers/Military members wouldn't make a criminal think twice about committing a shooting I guess.

 

In a related story, I just learned what a bullet button is.

 

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/05/01/bullet-button-used-to-get-around-california-gun-laws/

[HuskerNationNick]

I've come to the conclusion that Carlfense has all the answers and that the rest of use might as well not waste our time talking about this topic anymore. On to the Daily Skin forum we go.

 

I am done trying to discuss it. Armed Officers/Military members wouldn't make a criminal think twice about committing a shooting I guess.

 

In a related story, I just learned what a bullet button is.

 

http://sanfrancisco....ornia-gun-laws/

 

Lol I've never heard of it! Its pretty cool though.

[Ziggy]

Most likely any legislation will be flawed, grandfather in preexisting owned weapons, and allow for loopholes. And it is only going to get pasted because of our reactive society that is too lazy to figure out the real causes and blame the easiest thing possible. The problem is people not guns. We allow kids to watch violence on tv and in video games, but sex and nudity is a no no. We ignore the mental health epidemic in our country, and blame the weapons people use and not the people who allowed them to get the weapons.

 

Sure we need some comprehensive gun control, but banning assault rifles, or semi autos, or large capacity mags, is not going to stop people from using weapons to kill people. That kid in Conn. could have just as easily used a car to kill kids getting on or off buses, or made pipe bombs and threw them in class rooms. We don't blame alcohol when someone gets drunk and kills people. Its the idiot who got behind the wheel after drinking that is to blame. More than 10k people were killed in 2010 by drunk drivers, and almost 30 people die a day by drunk drivers, where are the cries to make cars and alcohol illegal.

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html