Reply to this topicStart new topic
> National Militia Guarding Schools?
Todd Simpson
post Dec 21 2012, 05:51 PM
Post #1


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.739
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



As you guys have heard, the recent tragedy of so many young people being killed by one lone NUTBAG has finally starting pushing us over the edge. It's just one tragedy too many and the victims are children. Unthinkable.

This has started a RAGING debate on Gun Control in the United States. We have more guns per capita than pretty much anywhere else on earth, even active war zones like Iraq and Yemen. Let's be honest. 300 million guns is a lot of guns. Only about HALF are registered weapons.

Sadly, restricting law abiding people with more laws is just wishful thinking. The NUTBAG in the recent shooting was using registered weapons that he stole from his mother. Newtown has some of the strongest gun laws in the country. Didn't help. An all out ban wouldn't stop a NUT from getting a gun any more than it stops people from buying illegal drugs in this country. Dope is easier to get than an education.

I"m not an NRA (National Rifle Association) Member. I"m not a "Prepper" or a Gun Nut.

***I do have one fire arm. ( A snub nose 38, nothing like an AK47 or Bushmaster Assault weapon) I practice at the range and I keep the gun clean and locked away. ***

I just saw a press conference where the NRA was making sense. They propose

1.)Tap our HUGE number of retired Military/Police/Reservists as a "Volunteer Militia" to provide schools with Armed, Trained Security personel.
2.)Create a National Database of said Volunteers that any district can request help from.

Purely volunteer, zero tax dollars, could have stopped the tragedy. It may sound over the top, but I think this could actually help. More laws on guns will just make folks feel better until the next shooting.

http://home.nra.org/#/home"" target="_blank"> http://home.nra.org/#/home

I know many folks in European countries has a VASTLY different relationship to guns/firearms in general. So i'm interested to see what folks think.

Todd




--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AK Rich
post Dec 21 2012, 07:59 PM
Post #2


Learning Guitar Hero
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.642
Joined: 10-September 11
From: Big Lake, Alaska
Member No.: 13.839



One could argue that this tragedy has happened as a result of gun laws since it happened in a so called "Gun Free Zone" as have most mass shootings in this country if not all of them. The NRA's proposal seems logical to me.

Also the main reason for the Second Amendment is to keep the Gov in check, A way to insure that Gov cannot become completely overbearing and tyrannical, also as a deterrant to a foriegn invader. Hundreds of millions of gun owners is a pretty formittable opponent for any force foriegn or domestic that would seek to control the people of this country.

Disarmament of the American people will never happen voluntarily, it would have to be done by force and it would not be pretty.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bossie
post Dec 21 2012, 08:30 PM
Post #3


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 628
Joined: 22-June 10
From: Belgium
Member No.: 10.711



Every step taken to make schools safer is a good step....but if a nutcase like this one
is going to execute his disgusting plan it' s almost unstoppable and he'll find an alternative way to commit
mass murder. This is extremely hard to handle and to prevent... but there's gotta be a way !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Dec 21 2012, 11:21 PM
Post #4


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.739
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



Yup smile.gif There's that. However, I was gonna let that alone. Seems to inflame some folks.

NewTown has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the entire country. But that didn't stop the tragedy. Laws only help the lawful IMHO. If the principal of that school would have been trained/armed/ready, this whole thing could have been averted.


QUOTE (AK Rich @ Dec 21 2012, 01:59 PM) *
One could argue that this tragedy has happened as a result of gun laws since it happened in a so called "Gun Free Zone" as have most mass shootings in this country if not all of them. The NRA's proposal seems logical to me.

Also the main reason for the Second Amendment is to keep the Gov in check, A way to insure that Gov cannot become completely overbearing and tyrannical, also as a deterrant to a foriegn invader. Hundreds of millions of gun owners is a pretty formittable opponent for any force foriegn or domestic that would seek to control the people of this country.

Disarmament of the American people will never happen voluntarily, it would have to be done by force and it would not be pretty.



Putting an armed/trained retired military/police guy at the front door of every school would be a start smile.gif

Todd


QUOTE (Bossie @ Dec 21 2012, 02:30 PM) *
Every step taken to make schools safer is a good step....but if a nutcase like this one
is going to execute his disgusting plan it' s almost unstoppable and he'll find an alternative way to commit
mass murder. This is extremely hard to handle and to prevent... but there's gotta be a way !



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Dec 21 2012, 11:49 PM
Post #5


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.841
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



its happened before http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster , and once again the laws were broken
it will probably happen again as long as there are humans

the problem is to many people want to use this for their agenda rather than fixing the problem
listen carefully to their actions cause their words are full of half truths

our leaders are going to talk about gun control when they are responsible for selling guns to drug cartels
when in fact those guns killed hundreds of mexicans and even a border patrol agent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Dec 22 2012, 02:34 AM
Post #6


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.739
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



As with any tragedy, like you are saying, it quickly gets twisted to match the Agenda of people on either side of a given debate. It's sad but that's politics. WADS of half truth flying on both sides. It remains to be seen if any momentum will carry forward enough to cause any real change.


QUOTE (jstcrsn @ Dec 21 2012, 05:49 PM) *
its happened before http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster , and once again the laws were broken
it will probably happen again as long as there are humans

the problem is to many people want to use this for their agenda rather than fixing the problem
listen carefully to their actions cause their words are full of half truths

our leaders are going to talk about gun control when they are responsible for selling guns to drug cartels
when in fact those guns killed hundreds of mexicans and even a border patrol agent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mudbone
post Dec 22 2012, 10:51 AM
Post #7


Learning Apprentice Player
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.750
Joined: 6-May 10
From: Charlotte, NC (residence)/Boston, MA (home) USA
Member No.: 10.329



I'm an NRA member, but I don't want to see schools militarized. Yeah, it may seem safer, but so is living the rest of your life in a bomb shelter. Who wants to live in a militarized society? I certainly don't. Virginia Tech had its own campus police, and it didn't help them much.

The issue is clearly mentally ill people having access to firearms, and more importantly, people having the desire to kill. The shooters in Colorado, Arizona, and the most recent one in Connecticut demonstrated severe mental instability well before the shootings, but their psychiatrists couldn't do anything legally to prevent them getting firearms. This has to change.

I'm not in favor of banning any of the weapons that are available on the market now. I think whats offered is reasonable. But I do think that there should be some requirements to buy a firearm, such as a license. It should be issued like Conceal Carry permits are issued, but the classes should be longer and also involve a mental evaluation. I would say an IQ test should be mandatory, but then nobody in Mississippi or Alabama could get one tongue.gif


QUOTE (jstcrsn @ Dec 21 2012, 06:49 PM) *
our leaders are going to talk about gun control when they are responsible for selling guns to drug cartels
when in fact those guns killed hundreds of mexicans and even a border patrol agent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal


http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012...-furious-truth/


--------------------


He who laughs last thinks slowest.

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens


Gear:

Guitars: Uncle Rufus' Twanger Classic
Amps: Mississippi Boom Box
Mojo: Hammer of Odin and a pair of Ox gonads
Inspiration: Samuel Adams Boston Lager

Zero to Hero: 1,387/10,000

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Dec 22 2012, 02:44 PM
Post #8


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.841
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Mudbone @ Dec 22 2012, 10:51 AM) *
I'm not in favor of banning any of the weapons that are available on the market now. I think whats offered is reasonable. But I do think that there should be some requirements to buy a firearm, such as a license. It should be issued like Conceal Carry permits are issued, but the classes should be longer and also involve a mental evaluation. I would say an IQ test should be mandatory, but then nobody in Mississippi or Alabama could get one tongue.gif




http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012...-furious-truth/

I like that idea of mentallye valuating before you get your conceal and carry, imo my instructor should not of had his, as far as A
CNN report not being biased , come on man , call a duck a duck
why did the administration said they had no knowledge but as the investigation got closer declared executive privilege , and how was this guy able to do a full report without being able to see that privileged information ?

This post has been edited by jstcrsn: Dec 22 2012, 02:45 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ulrik
post Dec 22 2012, 10:52 PM
Post #9


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 852
Joined: 11-December 07
From: Copenhagen
Member No.: 3.495



A Canadian friend of mine just posted this on facebook:

Columbine had an armed guard
Virginia Tech had their own police dept.
Ft. Hood was a military base


So if that are facts, what would more armed people matter?


Once again I must say, I see no reason that civilians have semi automatic weapons.


I don't have a gun, none of my friends do, I don't want one, I'm not afraid of guns, because I rarely hear about shootings here.
Just today the Danish news said, there had been really few murders in Denmark this year. It was credited to strict gun laws.
Last month we had two knife stabbings, both ended with murder, I guess there are some, who always bring a knife to parties (just for protection), and with some alcohol or drugs it goes bad. But you must admit it is harder to do a knife massacre, right?
When it comes to weapons, I'm glad we have the rules we do here.



Edit: If I can just add something. I consider Norway a very similar place to Denmark, and you know what happened there last year. Who was one of the first to get killed by Breivik on the Island? A cop/guard as I recall. So what could have stopped him? If all the 14-18 year olds had been given guns they could have killed him. Somehow I don't think arming kids are good.

And back to the suggestion. How many schools and universities do USA have? And would all those pensioners be patrolling for free 8 hours each day. I think you guys are too often thinking about killing the criminal, instead of making sure that he/she does not become a criminal in the first place. And you must admit it is really easy to become a killer with a gun in USA compared to other places. I've never heard anybody say, that their mom had a couple of guns at home, that would be so wierd here, that I wouldn't believe it.

It's crazy thinking what to do when it happens, cause someone determined to kill will be able to no matter what, so lets make sure he has no reason to kill.

This post has been edited by Ulrik: Dec 22 2012, 11:14 PM


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bossie
post Dec 22 2012, 11:17 PM
Post #10


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 628
Joined: 22-June 10
From: Belgium
Member No.: 10.711



Ofcours nobody likes armed personnel on schools...but a dramatic event like this requires dramatic changes.
This debate is really tough..
And america wants to create jobs so why not let every city or villagecouncil hire extra people with one purpose only ..surveillance
and entree checks non stop!
In Belgium guns are totally forbidden, unless you can get a licence after very deep screening like a jewelry seller. And still banks and stores are getting robbed with AK47's and automatic guns..it's so easy on the black market.
Couple a years ago a guy walked into a baby creche here and started slitting troats of the baby's with a potato knife ...There will always be lunatics unfortunatly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ulrik
post Dec 22 2012, 11:23 PM
Post #11


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 852
Joined: 11-December 07
From: Copenhagen
Member No.: 3.495



QUOTE (Bossie @ Dec 22 2012, 11:17 PM) *
And america wants to create jobs so why not let every city or villagecouncil hire extra people with one purpose only ..surveillance
and entree checks non stop!


I just don't believe it would be worth the hours and money spend, when a murderer will find a way to kill anyway. I do believe tha money could be spend better to help people


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mudbone
post Dec 23 2012, 12:06 AM
Post #12


Learning Apprentice Player
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.750
Joined: 6-May 10
From: Charlotte, NC (residence)/Boston, MA (home) USA
Member No.: 10.329



QUOTE (Ulrik @ Dec 22 2012, 05:52 PM) *
A Canadian friend of mine just posted this on facebook:

Columbine had an armed guard
Virginia Tech had their own police dept.
Ft. Hood was a military base


So if that are facts, what would more armed people matter?


Once again I must say, I see no reason that civilians have semi automatic weapons.


I don't have a gun, none of my friends do, I don't want one, I'm not afraid of guns, because I rarely hear about shootings here.
Just today the Danish news said, there had been really few murders in Denmark this year. It was credited to strict gun laws.
Last month we had two knife stabbings, both ended with murder, I guess there are some, who always bring a knife to parties (just for protection), and with some alcohol or drugs it goes bad. But you must admit it is harder to do a knife massacre, right?
When it comes to weapons, I'm glad we have the rules we do here.



Edit: If I can just add something. I consider Norway a very similar place to Denmark, and you know what happened there last year. Who was one of the first to get killed by Breivik on the Island? A cop/guard as I recall. So what could have stopped him? If all the 14-18 year olds had been given guns they could have killed him. Somehow I don't think arming kids are good.

And back to the suggestion. How many schools and universities do USA have? And would all those pensioners be patrolling for free 8 hours each day. I think you guys are too often thinking about killing the criminal, instead of making sure that he/she does not become a criminal in the first place. And you must admit it is really easy to become a killer with a gun in USA compared to other places. I've never heard anybody say, that their mom had a couple of guns at home, that would be so wierd here, that I wouldn't believe it.

It's crazy thinking what to do when it happens, cause someone determined to kill will be able to no matter what, so lets make sure he has no reason to kill.


Denmark also has low poverty, excellent public healthcare (to treat mentally ill people), and a fairly homogeneous society. You guys also have a sense community and caring for each other, something that is lacking from the culture here in the US. Over here its all about "me, me, me." Even though the US is considered a first world, advanced country, there is a lot of poverty here. In fact, millions of people live in poverty, some places look like third world countries.


--------------------


He who laughs last thinks slowest.

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens


Gear:

Guitars: Uncle Rufus' Twanger Classic
Amps: Mississippi Boom Box
Mojo: Hammer of Odin and a pair of Ox gonads
Inspiration: Samuel Adams Boston Lager

Zero to Hero: 1,387/10,000

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ulrik
post Dec 23 2012, 01:16 AM
Post #13


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 852
Joined: 11-December 07
From: Copenhagen
Member No.: 3.495



QUOTE (Mudbone @ Dec 23 2012, 12:06 AM) *
Over here its all about "me, me, me." Even though the US is considered a first world, advanced country, there is a lot of poverty here. In fact, millions of people live in poverty, some places look like third world countries.


I agree, that there is a difference and it has a lot to do with that

I think that a lot of the violence in Denmark is related somehow to "foreigners" immigrants, refugees, racial religious problems.
But France and Germany and spain... are composed of many different nationalities too and they have lower murder rates than US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...l_homicide_rate

I think poverty has a lot to do with it, and you can see this I think on the rates of baltic countries, former russian states.
Greenland is quite high here too


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Dec 23 2012, 01:56 AM
Post #14


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.739
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



A revolver is a "Semi Automatic" weapon, so is a Glock pistol. So you'd suggest going back to Ball and Musket? Black powder civil war guns? hmm.


The point is well taken though about FORT HOOD and VA tech. However, neither place was set up with the intent of stopping this kind of incident. Doing that would be nearly impossible at a university, or Military base IMHO, but you could do it as a grade school by eliminating all but once entrance/exit and not using glass as a security door. Glass is not a security measure. I don't like the idea of armed guys everywhere, but I like the idea of 20 kids getting shot even less. I say let the adults take their chances, but in grade schools I"d support volunteer, trained, armed guards.

QUOTE (Ulrik @ Dec 22 2012, 04:52 PM) *
A Canadian friend of mine just posted this on facebook:

Columbine had an armed guard
Virginia Tech had their own police dept.
Ft. Hood was a military base


So if that are facts, what would more armed people matter?


Once again I must say, I see no reason that civilians have semi automatic weapons.


I don't have a gun, none of my friends do, I don't want one, I'm not afraid of guns, because I rarely hear about shootings here.
Just today the Danish news said, there had been really few murders in Denmark this year. It was credited to strict gun laws.
Last month we had two knife stabbings, both ended with murder, I guess there are some, who always bring a knife to parties (just for protection), and with some alcohol or drugs it goes bad. But you must admit it is harder to do a knife massacre, right?
When it comes to weapons, I'm glad we have the rules we do here.



Edit: If I can just add something. I consider Norway a very similar place to Denmark, and you know what happened there last year. Who was one of the first to get killed by Breivik on the Island? A cop/guard as I recall. So what could have stopped him? If all the 14-18 year olds had been given guns they could have killed him. Somehow I don't think arming kids are good.

And back to the suggestion. How many schools and universities do USA have? And would all those pensioners be patrolling for free 8 hours each day. I think you guys are too often thinking about killing the criminal, instead of making sure that he/she does not become a criminal in the first place. And you must admit it is really easy to become a killer with a gun in USA compared to other places. I've never heard anybody say, that their mom had a couple of guns at home, that would be so wierd here, that I wouldn't believe it.

It's crazy thinking what to do when it happens, cause someone determined to kill will be able to no matter what, so lets make sure he has no reason to kill.



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ulrik
post Dec 23 2012, 06:18 PM
Post #15


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 852
Joined: 11-December 07
From: Copenhagen
Member No.: 3.495



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Dec 23 2012, 01:56 AM) *
A revolver is a "Semi Automatic" weapon, so is a Glock pistol. So you'd suggest going back to Ball and Musket? Black powder civil war guns? hmm.


The point is well taken though about FORT HOOD and VA tech. However, neither place was set up with the intent of stopping this kind of incident. Doing that would be nearly impossible at a university, or Military base IMHO, but you could do it as a grade school by eliminating all but once entrance/exit and not using glass as a security door. Glass is not a security measure. I don't like the idea of armed guys everywhere, but I like the idea of 20 kids getting shot even less. I say let the adults take their chances, but in grade schools I"d support volunteer, trained, armed guards.


Well I might have thought different if I had grown up in the US and had become more used to guns. Do a professionel hunter need more than 2 bullets?

I believe, that you are producing a generation of scared kids, who only feels safe in the presence of armed guards, and going through metal detectors to get to the class room. Getting told, that all this is because bad people want to kill them.
Growing up and getting their own guns, will these once scared kids shoot first and ask later when a "bad" black kid is lurking in the dark?

Anyway, the killer who has planned an attack then goes for the school bus, and if this is guarded, then the mall, the park, the public pool. Or maybe just makes a bomb instead to make sure he takes out the armed guard.


I don't understand all the views and oppinions when I live this far away, and only ever saw a metal detector in the airport, and only have seen a gun IRL with law officers/soldiers (I never had to be a soldier).
I don't have any fast or easy solutions, but Americans need to focus more on a cure instead of dealing with symptoms. And I know it's just easy for me to say it


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jan 8 2013, 10:07 PM
Post #16


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.739
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



You have a GREAT point here Ulrik. Our Govt keeps trying to tackle the symptoms and not the problems themselves. Our Mental Health apparatus FAILED us badly. These recent shooters were clearly disturbed people that should have been let "Off Leash" to be frank. Our love of "Freedom" seems to be a tad extreme to where we don't want to restrict people even if they are mentally ill/disturbed etc. (How do you tell? You get some professionals, as that's all we can do). But that has it's own problems, such as objective standards, etc. Not to mention, money. If a family identifies their son as "Disturbed" who is going to pay for his institutionalization and or home care professional? The State is unlikely to pony up if history is any indication.

I keep hoping for wise voices to rise and offer new solutions, but no luck yet and I"m drawing a blank.

Todd

QUOTE (Ulrik @ Dec 23 2012, 12:18 PM) *
Well I might have thought different if I had grown up in the US and had become more used to guns. Do a professionel hunter need more than 2 bullets?

I believe, that you are producing a generation of scared kids, who only feels safe in the presence of armed guards, and going through metal detectors to get to the class room. Getting told, that all this is because bad people want to kill them.
Growing up and getting their own guns, will these once scared kids shoot first and ask later when a "bad" black kid is lurking in the dark?

Anyway, the killer who has planned an attack then goes for the school bus, and if this is guarded, then the mall, the park, the public pool. Or maybe just makes a bomb instead to make sure he takes out the armed guard.


I don't understand all the views and oppinions when I live this far away, and only ever saw a metal detector in the airport, and only have seen a gun IRL with law officers/soldiers (I never had to be a soldier).
I don't have any fast or easy solutions, but Americans need to focus more on a cure instead of dealing with symptoms. And I know it's just easy for me to say it



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SirJamsalot
post Jan 9 2013, 12:04 AM
Post #17


Learning Rock Star
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.226
Joined: 4-May 10
From: Bay Area, California
Member No.: 10.312



It's not up to you to see reasons why a person should or shouldn't have something.
The U.S. founding fathers saw first hand what happens to countries who disarm their citizens - they become defenseless against tyrannical governments - where the law abiding citizen becomes the victim for abiding by laws that disarm them.

The U.S. placed in its constitution an amendment for the purpose of giving its citizens both the right to defend itself against tryanny, but also to overthrow its government (as a last but justifiable resort). That last right, to overthrow, presumes an ability to do so, which is what the second amendment attempts to secure for its citizens.

Different countries take different approaches, and whether that approach works for that particular country or not is of no consequence to the U.S. way of doing it. It's forefathers saw a need, and provided for it by means of law.

For every example a person can give where having a gun had no effect, a counter example can be found where it saved lives. So bean counting examples is not the issue. The issue is the underlying principle that U.S. citizens ought to have the right to defend themselves against its government should it become tyrannical, and be able to defend itself even at the ripe old age of 90 against a 20 year old thug.

I would also add that there are bad people in the world who kill for reasons other than being given a reason to kill. They might just be hateful, or insane, or jealous, or whatever. It is impossible to control the emotions and affections of a nation's population. There will always be crime - there will always be murder - there will always be corrupt governments - history has not given us reason to believe otherwise.


QUOTE (Ulrik @ Dec 22 2012, 01:52 PM) *
A Canadian friend of mine just posted this on facebook:

Columbine had an armed guard
Virginia Tech had their own police dept.
Ft. Hood was a military base


So if that are facts, what would more armed people matter?


Once again I must say, I see no reason that civilians have semi automatic weapons.


I don't have a gun, none of my friends do, I don't want one, I'm not afraid of guns, because I rarely hear about shootings here.
Just today the Danish news said, there had been really few murders in Denmark this year. It was credited to strict gun laws.
Last month we had two knife stabbings, both ended with murder, I guess there are some, who always bring a knife to parties (just for protection), and with some alcohol or drugs it goes bad. But you must admit it is harder to do a knife massacre, right?
When it comes to weapons, I'm glad we have the rules we do here.



Edit: If I can just add something. I consider Norway a very similar place to Denmark, and you know what happened there last year. Who was one of the first to get killed by Breivik on the Island? A cop/guard as I recall. So what could have stopped him? If all the 14-18 year olds had been given guns they could have killed him. Somehow I don't think arming kids are good.

And back to the suggestion. How many schools and universities do USA have? And would all those pensioners be patrolling for free 8 hours each day. I think you guys are too often thinking about killing the criminal, instead of making sure that he/she does not become a criminal in the first place. And you must admit it is really easy to become a killer with a gun in USA compared to other places. I've never heard anybody say, that their mom had a couple of guns at home, that would be so wierd here, that I wouldn't believe it.

It's crazy thinking what to do when it happens, cause someone determined to kill will be able to no matter what, so lets make sure he has no reason to kill.


This post has been edited by SirJamsalot: Jan 9 2013, 12:08 AM


--------------------
The more I practice, the more I wish I had time to practice!
My Band Forum: http://passionfly.site/chat

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PosterBoy
post Jan 9 2013, 07:40 AM
Post #18


Learning Roadie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.457
Joined: 26-October 11
From: Galway, Ireland
Member No.: 14.225



It's hard for people outside of the US who have not grown up with Gun Culture to understand some people's mentality and thinkings on this subject. I've seen more outward love of guns than God from some Christians in the US (and that's just on facebook!)

Some things I don't know about

What are the responsibilties of gun owners for secure storage of weapons when not on the person.
What checks are done by the government on gun owners and are they one offs, annual etc

I know a lot of the crime is by people who aren't legal gun owners, but having legal gun owners securing their guns better has got to help.



People are always want to talk and march about their rights, but not about their responsibilities


--------------------
Currently Working on

PosterBoy's Modern Riffing with Gabriel

PosterBoy's Bootcamp with Todd



Gear
Tyler Burning Water 2K
Burny RLG90 with BK Emeralds
Fender US Tele with BK Piledrivers
Axe Fx Ultra - GCP Pro
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jan 11 2013, 06:24 AM
Post #19


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.739
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



It's hard for me to imagine a culture where guns are largely banned. Places like England and Japan seem to get by just fine without them and they do have much lower rates of gun violence/death/crime. However, the "Gun Culture" is sorta integral to our identity in many ways that "anti fun folks" really just don't like. The long and bloody history of how my country was formed is well known. The founding documents even seem to suspect the govt will become corrupt and the citizenry will have to take on the military (Second Amendment paraphrase) .

While I"m all for regulation of weapons, and background checks, and even a mental health test (if you can't pass a simple mental health exam, approved by the surgeon general, I would vote you don't get a gun). The very nature of "States Rights" vs Federal Law (exemplified by quasi legal status of certain drugs in say California/Colorado) is gonna get in the way.

Essentially, the President can "Suggest" legislation on gun laws, but that's it. He can pass "executive orders" which the states can then ignore if they don't like them.

Keep in mind though, the more prohibited ANYTHING is, the more quickly the BLACK MARKET rises to service the need. 80 percent of criminals convicted for gun related crime used a NON REGISTERED WEAPON. So we are really talking about tryin to cut back on "Crazy People" grabbing moms gun and killing 20 people before he can be put down.

I have racked my brain for a solution to this and I've got nothing so far. What law/policy would have stopped that kid from grabbing the guns in the house. He was a legal adult. If the guns were locked up, he would probably know the code so he could defend the home (thus the need for the guns). If his condition/s were noticed sooner, maybe mom could have put the guns in lock boxes and NOT given him the code. But there's no way to enforce gun owners and lock boxes other than house to house daily searches which would just not be tolerated.

back to the drawing board.


QUOTE (PosterBoy @ Jan 9 2013, 01:40 AM) *
It's hard for people outside of the US who have not grown up with Gun Culture to understand some people's mentality and thinkings on this subject. I've seen more outward love of guns than God from some Christians in the US (and that's just on facebook!)

Some things I don't know about

What are the responsibilties of gun owners for secure storage of weapons when not on the person.
What checks are done by the government on gun owners and are they one offs, annual etc

I know a lot of the crime is by people who aren't legal gun owners, but having legal gun owners securing their guns better has got to help.



People are always want to talk and march about their rights, but not about their responsibilities



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st July 2017 - 01:51 PM