School Shooting in Connecticut - Multiple Fatalities

[Ifreann]

No one who has ever smoked would say that cigarettes only cause death.


Hey, this is fun. I get why people do it now.

What, do they stop hair loss?

BTW, you're right. Sometimes cigarette smoking only causes Emphysema, Cancer, etc (although that can eventually lead to death).

They also make you look cool.

[Desperate Measures]

Simple, enact a federal mandate that all firearms transactions of any kind be predicated on passing a more stringent background check than the one currently utilized. If any seller, licensed or private, fails to initiate background check and the purchaser of said firearm goes on to commit murder, the seller who neglected to perform the test is now indicted as an accessory to murder and instant forfeiture of their assets.

Hit people in their pocketbook and their time and you'll get compliance very quickly.

Well, hells bells, since we are going this far, why not apply that to anything that is bought and sold privately then? Why exclude other items that could cause the death of another person. Another issue would be the extreme over-burdensome paperwork of those poor souls at the ATF / FBI to run these checks. And I firmly believe many people would chance it and not deal with the hassle and expense of performing the background check.
And I believe some guy In Kent, WA? was sentenced in selling a fire arm that was used in a murder in chicago.

Are you really worried about adding paperwork upon those poor souls at the ATF? Are you really?

[Miss Defied]

Yeah really.. I'm surprised they haven't done anything to prevent this in the past. Why not a better security system for schools? Practically anyone can walk in the front doors. Shows how much the government cares about safety over their school children.

The school has recently implemented strong security procedures. Peole need to be buzzed in after someone in the office sees them on video surviellance. My kids elementary school has had this in place for well over a decade. But as the assailant was the son of a teacher there, who may have been well known by staff, not so hard to understand how he got in.

And now that I think of it, if this school's system is anything like the school my kids went to, all exterior doors are locked to the outside at all times and accessible only by a swipe card given to faculty and staff. Given the fact that reports say he killed his mother at home, it's possible he took her card and was able to access the building that way.

[Virana]

There've been numerous shootings or attempted shootings where the shooter only stopped because he was held at gunpoint by an armed person in the crowd, who, in each case, either withheld the shooter until police arrived, or fired and killed the shooter in self-defense due to the shooter's likely reluctance to give in.

Source.

Here's one.

[Frisivisia]

Source.

Here's one.

Biased article, one example. I'd say that's bullshit.

[Jocabia]

Source.

Here's one.

What do you think that source says?

[Condunum]

Source.

Here's one.

This is, of course, ignoring when the shooter just guns the resistance down.

[Grinning Dragon]

Well, hells bells, since we are going this far, why not apply that to anything that is bought and sold privately then? Why exclude other items that could cause the death of another person. Another issue would be the extreme over-burdensome paperwork of those poor souls at the ATF / FBI to run these checks. And I firmly believe many people would chance it and not deal with the hassle and expense of performing the background check.
And I believe some guy In Kent, WA? was sentenced in selling a fire arm that was used in a murder in chicago.

Are you really worried about adding paperwork upon those poor souls at the ATF? Are you really?

No not really, in fact I would like to see the BATFe (and really big fires) eliminated. But you know full well the speed of govt is here in the US, a snail has a faster pace, then those departments will need to hire additional staff due to the influx of background checks, that means more workers on the govt payroll, then those departments will need funding for additional staff plus benefits, training (you know the usual shit, harassment, sexual, first aid, parking procedures, etc.) since their budget has now been shot to hell, that means we hear on the news of the now new firearms background check fiscal cliff and we need to raise taxes to pay these wonderful souls. And so on and so on and so on.

[Neo Art]

There is, I think, a very strange disconnect between the pro gun arguments here, and it's created a bit of logical inconsistancy. On one hand is the argument that banning guns wouldn't do anything, because a person determined to kill would still kill, and what's next, do we ban knives and bats and bits of rock next? So what if guns are designed to kill, the argument goes, many things kill. You can't legislate the desire to kill, so they say, so if we ban one method of killing they're only find another.

The other argument is to say that the solution rests in a more armed populace. More armed guards, more armed teachers, more arrmed everybody.

The problem here is that both of these arguments get uttered at the same time, but they're entirely inconsistant. EIther having a gun doesn't give one a particular advantage in killing large amount of people, in which case why worry about arming MORE people with guns? In fact, to make a claim that we should have a more armed populace inherently rests on the presumption that guns are exceptionally efficient tools to kill people with. And while crazy people may go crazy and kill people, we have to accept that guns make them much better at it.

Which is why we want the people protecting us to have them.

[Virana]

Here's one.

Biased article, one example. I'd say that's bullshit.

Yep, best I could get quickly. I read a really good article once, cited several studies and statistics and even actual events of what I described, but I can't seem to find that one right now.

I'll keep looking for sources if you'd like.

Either way, no matter how biased, that article does contain some true and interesting facts.

[Desperate Measures]

Are you really worried about adding paperwork upon those poor souls at the ATF? Are you really?

No not really, in fact I would like to see the BATFe (and really big fires) eliminated. But you know full well the speed of govt is here in the US, a snail has a faster pace, then those departments will need to hire additional staff due to the influx of background checks, that means more workers on the govt payroll, then those departments will need funding for additional staff plus benefits, training (you know the usual shit, harassment, sexual, first aid, parking procedures, etc.) since their budget has now been shot to hell, that means we hear on the news of the now new firearms background check fiscal cliff and we need to raise taxes to pay these wonderful souls. And so on and so on and so on.

Freedom isn't free, ya know.

[Mavorpen]

No not really, in fact I would like to see the BATFe (and really big fires) eliminated. But you know full well the speed of govt is here in the US, a snail has a faster pace, then those departments will need to hire additional staff due to the influx of background checks, that means more workers on the govt payroll, then those departments will need funding for additional staff plus benefits, training (you know the usual shit, harassment, sexual, first aid, parking procedures, etc.) since their budget has now been shot to hell, that means we hear on the news of the now new firearms background check fiscal cliff and we need to raise taxes to pay these wonderful souls. And so on and so on and so on.

Freedom isn't free, ya know.

Which is why I steal it.

#thuglife

[Grinning Dragon]

No not really, in fact I would like to see the BATFe (and really big fires) eliminated. But you know full well the speed of govt is here in the US, a snail has a faster pace, then those departments will need to hire additional staff due to the influx of background checks, that means more workers on the govt payroll, then those departments will need funding for additional staff plus benefits, training (you know the usual shit, harassment, sexual, first aid, parking procedures, etc.) since their budget has now been shot to hell, that means we hear on the news of the now new firearms background check fiscal cliff and we need to raise taxes to pay these wonderful souls. And so on and so on and so on.

Freedom isn't free, ya know.

Yeah, I know, but it doesn't need to come with an ass fucking either.

[Mavorpen]

Freedom isn't free, ya know.

Yeah, I know, but it doesn't need to come with an ass fucking either.

Could this post be any more anti-homosexuality?

[Typhlochactas]

Yeah, I know, but it doesn't need to come with an ass fucking either.

Could this post be any more anti-homosexuality?

Well, it could always be a girl with a strap on.

[Northern Dominus]

Simple, enact a federal mandate that all firearms transactions of any kind be predicated on passing a more stringent background check than the one currently utilized. If any seller, licensed or private, fails to initiate background check and the purchaser of said firearm goes on to commit murder, the seller who neglected to perform the test is now indicted as an accessory to murder and instant forfeiture of their assets.

Hit people in their pocketbook and their time and you'll get compliance very quickly.

Well, hells bells, since we are going this far, why not apply that to anything that is bought and sold privately then? Why exclude other items that could cause the death of another person. Another issue would be the extreme over-burdensome paperwork of those poor souls at the ATF / FBI to run these checks. And I firmly believe many people would chance it and not deal with the hassle and expense of performing the background check.
And I believe some guy In Kent, WA? was sentenced in selling a fire arm that was used in a murder in chicago.

Given how royally they've screwed up recent field actions, the ATF might be better served processing paperwork. Given that the modern background check is nothing more than frippery and frankly a joke, I'd rather have a little extra paperwork and make somebody wait rather than speed the process up and give some nutjob a high-capacity weapon that shouldn't have one.

And I live in Chicago, so I know very well. The asshole only got 1 year for aiding the murder of a resident. But he should be the example for people who, if my theoretical legislation were implemented, would happen. With none of their shiny guns to protect them in prison because they wanted to "risk it" or be lazy, reality would hit home really quickly.

Besides, a person deserves whatever punishment is thrown their way if they're going to sell an item explicitly designed to kill to somebody they don't know very well without doing the right thing and making sure that person isn't liable to go murder somebody. That's not an encumbrance, doing that is called being a good goddamn citizen, and if it takes legislation to force people to be good citizens then that's what it takes.
Put it this way: if that person sells their firearm to some random person at a gun show without checking who they are, where they came from, if they're a felon or have sociopathic tendencies, then the person who bought the firearm without any background check whatsoever uses that weapon to gun down your significant other, or your children, or your parents, or anyone you care deeply about, would you not then wonder why the person who did the killing wasn't prevented from owning a firearm? Why somebody didn't do the right thing and make sure they weren't putting a device that makes killing almost effortless into the hands of a maniac?

[Bafuria]

4 times the mass shootings?

America has 10 times the Household gun ownership rate
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 64/?page=3

American gun owners seem to me to be more responsible than British ones.

The UK has had 3 mass shootings in the same space of time (30 years) as America has had 62 mass shootings, which are presumably not generally perpetrated by 'responsible' home-owners. Essentially what I am advocating is keeping guns from being readily available to every crazy person or criminal who fancies a pop at some school children. Unbalanced individuals will almost always appear in a population; you don't need to empower them massively with freely available guns.
Nice 19 year old population figures by the way, here are some newer relevant figures, from 2007 http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... world-list

Also, Dunblane could easily have been carried out with a pump-action rifle like the ones you find in Australian gun stores today.
Dunblane was also an exception, in the vast majority of cases (Including the Utoya massacre) mass shooters fire fewer than 10 rounds per minute, meaning that replacing semi-automatic rifles with manually operated ones won't make any difference.

I'm not advocating Australian gun control, nor am I advocating Norwegian gun control.

The newer figures you posted are much worse than the ones I posted.

Guns per capita and household gun ownership rates are two entirely different statistics. The latter being much more reliable.

[Jocabia]

Biased article, one example. I'd say that's bullshit.

Yep, best I could get quickly. I read a really good article once, cited several studies and statistics, but I can't seem to find that one right now.

I'll keep looking for sources if you'd like.

Either way, no matter how biased, that article does contain some true and interesting facts.

About some actually credible sources documenting the individual incidents? I get there are pro-gun sources. You said there were tons of events where CCW holders prevent massacres. So just link to those.

I'll point out that the gunman's mother owned guns and there were clearly accessible. How did that work out for her? According to the ITG's, he should have been dead before he even got his hands up.

[Yes Im Biop]

Target shooting. No death, maiming, or making someone believe that they will be killed or maimed.

I win.

Not really because target shooting has one purpose...to increase your shooting proficiency. To become more adept at shooting firearms where the ultimate goal is to kill. Simulated or real.

How can someone be so very horribly wrong?

[Desperate Measures]

Freedom isn't free, ya know.

Which is why I steal it.

#thuglife

Word.

[Grinning Dragon]

Yeah, I know, but it doesn't need to come with an ass fucking either.

Could this post be any more anti-homosexuality?

Yes Mav, only the term ass fucking can only be construed as being anti homosexual, and as you so evidently pointed out that must have been my only intention in using said phrase. /rolls eyes.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Target shooting. No death, maiming, or making someone believe that they will be killed or maimed.

I win.

Not really because target shooting has one purpose...to increase your shooting proficiency. To become more adept at shooting firearms where the ultimate goal is to kill. Simulated or real.

Again, no death, no maiming, and no threats of death or maiming. Wisconsin9's criteria, not mine. Therefore, I win.

My ultimate goal is to score the most points.

What animal does this simulate? http://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Pin-Targe ... B007K4RBBK

How about this one? http://galatiinternational.com/product/GTBOTTLE.html

And this one? http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachme ... umbler.jpg

Can you notice the resemblance? http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/i ... u=00161WHI

[Yes Im Biop]

If the teachers pass thorough background checks, then what's the problem?

That the teacher is the kind of person who feels it necessary to carry a gun into a room full of children.

That's the sound of the point missing you by a million Miles.

[Tubbsalot]

That's the sound of the point missing you by a million Miles.

no UR dumb

[Jocabia]

That the teacher is the kind of person who feels it necessary to carry a gun into a room full of children.

That's the sound of the point missing you by a million Miles.

Which point is that? The point that you'd bring a weapon that kills tons of children every year in accidental shootings around a bunch of children to prevent a vanishingly small likelihood of a massacre.

It's like keeping a flamethrower in case the heat goes out.