Massive School Shooting at an Elementary School

[DGFone]

A. The military is not the only force a tyrant can use against the people. Case in point: the Gestapo and Russia's secret police.

B. There's a difference that I forgot to say: If one nutcase simply declares the president a tyrant, they will never get through the bodyguards. (By the way, presidents in the past have been assassinated by people who believed the president was harming the nation) If someone is a tyrant, enough people will fight, that the tyrant will lose.

C. People will always be armed. Don't get them paranoid.

D. A tyrant can still play the system to remove the checks and balances. Like Biomac said: the constitution can be changed. And the first thing a tyrant will do is force a removal of the second amendment. Now let's see the same tyrant try to remove the guns and ammo from people's houses. And this is a fact: if someone will try to remove guns from America, a noticable percent will fight back.

[HasiraKali]

Hasira and Az: Depending on the state, you can in fact own military style small-arms. You won't be able to get a tank or anything like that, but M-16 and AR-15/AR-10 rifles are some of the best sellers in the nation. Even in California, the state infamous for its gun laws, allows you to buy an assault rifle under these conditions: 1. 10 round mag tops. 2. Semi-fire only. No full auto. 3. You need a reloading tool. No pushing a button to reload.

And that's the problem. They shouldn't be available to the general public, I'm sorry. Actually, I'm not.

Look where I live. Guns are everywhere here.

[DGFone]

And that's the problem. They shouldn't be available to the general public, I'm sorry. Actually, I'm not.

Look where I live. Guns are everywhere here.

So do everyone where I live. (Even in gun-allergic California). I find that being around guns, leaning about them, and accepting them is much better than fearing them. Yes, I was afraid of guns. Then I held one and shot it at a target.

I personally think that most people are afraid of guns because of video games and hollywood: places where you don't see how much effort it takes to maintain a gun (translation: don't get one unless you are ready for all the maintenance), the fact that gun can carry 30 rounds in a very large magazine and not 500. That shooting one is not as easy as clicking your mouse or pushing a button on your controller. Ignorance of guns leads to fear of them.

[HasiraKali]

I don't even know where to begin with that.

A gun itself isn't scary. It's the person that uses it. And there is no logical need for a gun in the hands of a private citizen that can shoot multiple rounds per second. There just isn't.

[DGFone]

I don't even know where to begin with that.

A gun itself isn't scary. It's the person that uses it. And there is no logical need for a gun in the hands of a private citizen that can shoot multiple rounds per second. There just isn't.

People will always want guns, and many need them. Now what kind of gun are you going to get?
A civilian version of what's already being made for the military or a special-order single-shot smooth-bore musket?

The reason why people who have guns have guns that can shoot multiple rounds is simply because those are the only guns being made in the first place.

[HasiraKali]

You are clearly not reading my posts. Or, at the very least, you are misinterpreting them.

I said I don't think guns should be banned completely, but certain types and their accoutrements should not be available to private citizens.

[DGFone]

It's where I had the comparison to video game DRM: Why are you going to punish the many innocent just to try (and generally FAIL) to stop the minority?

I'll give you a good reason (and a bad reason) why I might want a gun that can shoot many bullets often: To stop someone with a similar gun, or o stop a group of people if they wish physical crime on my, my family, or anyone/thing else I care for. Remember, at the end of the day, if a criminal really wants to, no law will stop them from getting a machine gun. Let me at least the right to own a semi-auto rifle to ward off that, okay?

Plus, I think even you are curious what it will be like to blow off 250 rounds in a machine gun at a shooting range.

This is the biggest mind bender I am seeing with this kind of argument:

We all agree that guns are not the problem, but people. So why are you guys proposing solutions that are about the gun - about the part that isn't the problem.

[HasiraKali]

Actually, I have no interest in firing that kind of weapon thanks.

That is an excellent question. The gun itself isn't the problem, it's the availability of the gun and this person clearly had some sort of mental illness that was unaddressed. Justine Bateman hits it on the head as it were, "Why does a tragedy like 9/11 change everything about air travel, but numerous gun massacres CHANGE NOTHING?" It's going to come down to what's easiest and most cost effective to change: gun control or mental health care (since a good majority of people that perpetrate these crimes are mentally disabled in some way). There isn't a solution that will please everyone.

Oh and to go back to the "criminals will find a way" argument, why have laws at all then?

And as for your reason, you're going to carry a semi-automatic rifle everywhere you go? These shootings are happening everywhere. Malls, movie theaters, schools, churches, etc. I understand the desire to protect what's important, but that seems paranoid.

[DGFone]

Actually, I have no interest in firing that kind of weapon thanks.

Justine Bateman hits it on the head as it were, "Why does a tragedy like 9/11 change everything about air travel, but numerous gun massacres CHANGE NOTHING?"

Uh... define "numerous". These guns crimes are VERY FEW and VERY far in between.

And honestly, I have no idea why 9/11 changed air line travel. After all, Flight 93 proved that the tactics used during 9/11 became useless... during 9/11. The change in airline was just appeasement towards mass hysteria.

As for guns everywhere: Can I not keep my guns in my own home? Can a shopkeeper not keep a gun in his shop (or whichever privately owned business they own)? It's one thing to try and solve gun crime in public places (giving teachers guns won't work. But you do need to teach them how to deal with armed intruders better). But in a private place? Let me deal with an armed intruder with my own gun. I don't want to wait for the police, for as history shows, they tend to arrive too late.

And the availability question again: Gun crime happens ALL THE TIME. By people who don't care about the laws, and only take advantage that their victims often can't defend themselves. Mental illness? Only happened ONCE.

Might as well ban people. That will stop crime.

[HasiraKali]

Are you serious?