Massive School Shooting at an Elementary School

[Regulus]

All the people that have been the catalyst for these events were trained in how to use a gun.

How else would they have been able to hit anything?

One does not simply pick up a gun and shoot everyone in sight without learning how to shoot first.

And, yeah, look at the military.

Shooting and killing isn't something that should be glorified. It screws with these people's lives, and by no small margin.

And having children near guns is like having an elephant graveyard in your backyard. Just saying.

[Woeler]

[quote="DGFone"]gun violence is actually dropping, with less people dying each year from guns.[/quote]
Just gonna hop in and out here.

In the United States, annual deaths resulting from firearms total

2011: 32,163
2010: 31,672
2009: 31,347
2008: 31,593
2007: 31,224
2006: 30,896
2005: 30,694
2004: 29,569
2003: 30,136
2002: 30,242
2001: 29,573
2000: 28,663
1999: 28,874

In the United States, annual firearm suicides total

2011: 19,766
2010: 19,392
2009: 18,735
2008: 18,223
2007: 17,352
2006: 16,883
2005: 17,002
2004: 16,750
2003: 16,907
2002: 17,108
2001: 16,869
2000: 16,586
1999: 16,599

The number of firearm homicides is slightly decreasing. Not the deaths.

Source: The international bulletin of firearm injury prevention.

[DGFone]

[quote="Regulus"]
And, yeah, look at the military.

Shooting and killing isn't something that should be glorified. It screws with these people's lives, and by no small margin.[/quote]

Suicide is one thing. Terrible, but it's not a military person picking up a gun and pointing it at someone else.

And if I were to say what is at fault, if it were just one thing, then you hit it right on the mark: "Shooting and killing isn't something that should be glorified".

Do tell me why every-time someone shoots someone else, it gets media attention for... ever? After all, isn't killing a lot of people the easiest way to become 'immortal'. The best thing the media can do about mass-shootings is to shut up about them, and to stop giving criminals ideas.

Just saying.

[TheLionPrince]

[Regulus]

My whole point is that while guns aren't the problem, taking them away *is* the solution.

No matter how hard you try, there's some things you can't fix. Anything dealing with mental health falls into that category.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. People with guns *can* kill more people. You can't control people, so take away the guns and the problem is greatly reduced. It's just logic.

IMO the only people that should ever have guns, even handguns such as pistols, are those in law enforcement. I know it won't happen, but ideally, that's the way to go.

In today's society, we do not need guns for anything. I've never even been near a real, working gun in my life, and unless there's an apocalypse of some sort, I don't think any civilian ever needs a lethal weapon unless they want to commit suicide and maybe even... oh wait...

It's not like I need one for self defense, because if someone is breaking into my house, I'm collecting fingerprints and calling the police. In fact, statistically speaking [citation needed] the best deterrent for burglars isn't guns, but dogs.

Or, even better yet, let's just replace all guns with tasers. It's self defense, but without the consequence of serious injury or death of the person on the other end. Everybody wins.

[DGFone]

Taking away guns won't be the solution, as all you're doing is preventing regular citizens from defending themselves. Remember, if you are planning to commit a crime, you will be able to get a gun, no matter how banned they are. All it means if guns are banned is that you won't have to worry about old granny taking out a 9mm and pointing it at your head until the police arrive. Some of the safest cities in the world are the places in the Midwest where the ratio of guns to citizens easily reach 1:1.

And remember that at the end of the day, no one gets a gun to use it, unless they get one specifically for the range. When people get guns to defend themselves, they don't plan to use them, but that "I'll deal with the problem myself" mentality also happens to be the same mentality that drives innovation: Solve the problem yourself, or wait for someone else to reach the same conclusion.

Regulus: Someone broke into your house. Their criminals, and chances are, they planned it out. This means that they don't care about the law, and guess what? They are very likely to have a gun. Are you really going to take their fingerprints and call the police, informing them that someone is in the house and can make a hostage if needed to?

And here's why tasers won't work: They have horrible range, and it really is like going up against an M-16 with a smooth-bore musket. Your reloading time takes forever, you only get one shot, and I don't see any sort of sights on those things. Then comes the uncertainty factor: How do you know that the intruder is alone?

And speaking of tasers: D.C., with some of the highest gun-crime rates, makes it illigal for people to carry tasers with them. Where's the logic in that?


Edit: TLP: You really don't need to worry about people trying to rob gun shops. Doing that got people into the Darwin awards, twice. It's simple to guess why: you are robbing a store where the workers are professionals, surrounded by guns. Your chances of success are low at best.

[TheLionPrince]

[quote="Regulus"] My whole point is that while guns aren't the problem, taking them away *is* the solution. [/quote]
Larry Pratt, the founder of Gun Owners of America said “If there was a way to remove all the guns, then I would have a different opinion” and he’s right, but most people who use a gun did have the right to have one in the first place. Meaning that if you banned them all, what would happen? These people who have them illegally would have them.
[quote="Regulus"] Guns don't kill people. People kill people. People with guns *can* kill more people. You can't control people, so take away the guns and the problem is greatly reduced. It's just logic. [/quote]
Are you talking about massacres or gun crime in general? Because that’s two different things. Yes, guns kill more people in massacres, but that is about 1% of all gun homocides. The other 99% are cases where other methods could be used. An example: The UK has a big knife crime problem. In fact, they are talking about banning those. Now ask yourself this: If an American criminal had no gun, but only a knife, would he still kill someone if he wanted to? You may want to re-read what I posted about the Christmas tree stand killing
[quote="Regulus"] In today's society, we do not need guns for anything. I've never even been near a real, working gun in my life, and unless there's an apocalypse of some sort, I don't think any civilian ever needs a lethal weapon unless they want to commit suicide and maybe even... oh wait...[/quote]
Sporting purposes and self-defense are big reasons. A better question would be: "Why do we need assault weapons?" but even that argument is flawed since they are used rarely in gun crimes. Like I said, if we want to get serious about gun crime, we need to address mental health. Did you know that access to mental health care is worse than other types of medical services?
[quote="Regulus"] Or, even better yet, let's just replace all guns with tasers. It's self defense, but without the consequence of serious injury or death of the person on the other end. Everybody wins.[/quote]
I actually love that idea (no sarcasm) but can we get every bad guy to do it?

[quote="DGFone"]You really don't need to worry about people trying to rob gun shops. Doing that got people into the Darwin awards, twice. It's simple to guess why: you are robbing a store where the workers are professionals, surrounded by guns. Your chances of success are low at best.[/quote]
That argument doesn't make sense. Fort Hood Military Base was one of the most secure places in America, but they had a shooting.

[DGFone]

[quote="TheLionPrince"]
That argument doesn't make sense. Fort Hood Military Base was one of the most secure places in America, but they had a shooting.[/quote]

I looked into the Ford Hood shooting, and what I find is... troublesome.

For one, the shooter blended well into his surroundings. There are both civilians and military personal on base, so you can dress up in pretty much anything and not gather attention.

But what I am most concerned about: Military personal on base were not allowed to carry firearms on them due to regulations. So even though they were soldiers, they were still rather helpless to fight back. I would imagine that if they were allowed to at least carry around an M-16 (impossible to hide), like in bases in Israel, then this massacre would have instead been a small 15-minute late-night incident.

[TheLionPrince]

When I talked about the ATF checking gun shops, I wasn't talking about people robbing them for guns. I was talking about bad sellers. Read this Washington Post article, it shows how gun tracing and crime are related.

[quote]For three decades, tracing was used mostly to help police catch criminals linked to recovered guns. But in 1995, Professor Glenn L. Pierce of Northeastern University analyzed ATF tracing data and discovered that a tiny fraction of gun dealers - 1 percent - were the original sellers of a majority of the guns seized at crime scenes - 57 percent.[/quote]

My original point was that under the law the police cannot go to these gun dealers are do inventory and checks to make sure they were properly sold. The ATF is so underfunded they don't even have a leader. If we enforced these laws that we already have, this gun problem could be solved.

[DGFone]

^ That's a different story all together, and one that I agree with.

Selling guns illegally, often to people who plan to murder (after all, most guns in Mexico are American made), should be punishable just as much as if you went and pulled the trigger yourself. I agree that it should be made easier and more often to check that gun stores comply with the law in terms of who and who cannot walk away with one.

But I think that we can agree that if a gun shop manager is crooked, I don't think the type of gun matters. So banning guns will not stop this problem either.