Grade school shooting in Connecticut

[KBLEE]

Originally Posted by Illinoise

My premise is that guns are a problem, not that they are evil. If you disagree then there is no point. I am only suggesting that we must be able to do better. This kid had access to military style weapons that were capable of doing extraordinary damage in a short amount of time. Clips with 30 rounds in them is not making anyone safer. You can't stop bad people from doing bad things but common sense seems to be lacking here. You may want to accept this as the price of freedom, I don't. I think we can do better.

It is a matter of education. Anyone with these types of weapons MUST have them locked away in a gun safe. As they were registered to his mother, it was her responsibility as the owner to keep them away from him (assuming he had a mental disorder). She failed to do so and is now dead, along with many innocent victims.

The solution is not as complex as many make it out to be. Education, education, education.

[Ransom Stoddard]

Originally Posted by Illinoise

My premise is that guns are a problem, not that they are evil. If you disagree then there is no point. I am only suggesting that we must be able to do better. This kid had access to military style weapons that were capable of doing extraordinary damage in a short amount of time. Clips with 30 rounds in them is not making anyone safer. You can't stop bad people from doing bad things but common sense seems to be lacking here. You may want to accept this as the price of freedom, I don't. I think we can do better.

There is a difference between military "style" weapons and military weapons. The general public sees a gun that *looks* like a military weapon and instantly thinks it's a full auto merchant of destruction.

And they're called magazines, not clips.

[Illinoise]

Originally Posted by KBLEE

It is a matter of education. Anyone with these types of weapons MUST have them locked away in a gun safe. As they were registered to his mother, it was her responsibility as the owner to keep them away from him (assuming he had a mental disorder). She failed to do so and is now dead, along with many innocent victims.

The solution is not as complex as many make it out to be. Education, education, education.

Are you proposing government regulation to accomplish this? I am not trying to be snarky, I just don't know how you really accomplish this. Easy to say but very difficult to legislate. My general impression is that a segment of society views these weapons as toys instead of for self defense. A two hour class every time you buy a gun?
I am all in favor of imposing the same sentence on the gun owner if it shows they were irresponsible in how they secured their weapons.

[Illinoise]

Originally Posted by Ransom Stoddard

There is a difference between military "style" weapons and military weapons. The general public sees a gun that *looks* like a military weapon and instantly thinks it's a full auto merchant of destruction.

And they're called magazines, not clips.

Problem solved!

[Clemens]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

See you think it is silly. I think you are ignorant to ignore history but then again those ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. You're all probably too young to remember the civil unrest of the 60's. You probably don't recall half of Chicago on fire or a mayor issue a shoot to kill order. You might not recall armed soldiers gunning down college kids in Ohio.

Tell the Syrians or Libyans that you cannot oppose a government that becomes tyranical.



The murder rate in the US (4.7/100K) is less than half what it was in 1980 (10.2/100K). Heck it is about half what it was in 1993 (9.5/100K). Crime is dropping nationwide. Why anyone would pretend otherwise in an effort to advance a silly agenda is beyond me.

Oh come on really? You should know that correlation is not the same as cause and effect. Anyone who seriously studies this issue says looser gun laws have little to no influence in decreasing crime rates.


US crime rate is down: six key reasons

Answer me this, we already have the most guns per capita of any country, if gun ownership decreases crime, why don't we already have the lowest crime rates in the world?

[-josh-]

Originally Posted by Clemens

Oh come on really? You should know that correlation is not the same as cause and effect. Anyone who seriously studies this issue says looser gun laws have little to no influence in decreasing crime rates.


US crime rate is down: six key reasons

[B]Answer me this, we already have the most guns per capita of any country, if gun ownership decreases crime, why don't we already have the lowest crime rates in the world?[B/]

[-josh-]

In answer to the above since I'm on my phone, because education is in the !!!!ter, that's why, most of our problems fall back on the failure if our educational system.

[Clemens]

Originally Posted by -josh-

In answer to the above since I'm on my phone, because education is in the !!!!ter, that's why, most of our problems fall back on the failure if our educational system.

you're seriously blaming our crime rate on our schools?

[Thor015]

It's too bad gibb52's post didn't get more attention. I copied it and posted it on my FB page.

On a side note reading the interaction in this thread is saddening. I won't say which side of the argument I am on but will say everyone should re read Gibbs post and re read it again.

Then do something. Go home and find a way to make your community safer and more of a community. And not by banning OR adding guns. Find a way to meet your neighbor or make a local school safer. Make sure to go to a school and find out what they are doing to make the school safer and see how you can help, even if it is monetarily.

If donating to schools, especially to make it safer, isn't a tax write off then push your local officials to make it one.

[-josh-]

Originally Posted by Clemens

you're seriously blaming our crime rate on our schools?

On education in general yes.

[Clemens]

Originally Posted by -josh-

On education in general yes.

I'd like to see a serious study that shows a cause and effect relationship there.

[-josh-]

Originally Posted by Clemens

I'd like to see a serious study that shows a cause and effect relationship there.

I dont think it's any secret that our educational system has been poor to midling for years now.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by Clemens

Oh come on really? You should know that correlation is not the same as cause and effect. Anyone who seriously studies this issue says looser gun laws have little to no influence in decreasing crime rates.


US crime rate is down: six key reasons

Answer me this, we already have the most guns per capita of any country, if gun ownership decreases crime, why don't we already have the lowest crime rates in the world?

Clemens, you may want to read more carefully. I didn't say that guns decreased the crime rate. I said our crime rate has dramatically decreased at a time when gun access has become easier.

Therefore, those of you that would use crime as a reason to increase controls on guns have some explaining to do.

Surely if legal gun access leads to more crime we should have seen an explosion in gun violence in the past 20 years as we relaxed the laws. The simple fact is that we did not. Therefore there is no reason to think that increasing the difficulty in finding guns legally will decrease the amount of gun violence we face.

It is simply illogical.

You don't make the world safer by banning things be they guns or drugs or alcohol. All you do is create criminals and give them a source of revenue. There has been a world wide ban on drugs for 50 years. Yet they are ubiquitous and a teenager can get them without a license or any trouble. Why would anyone think that making guns more restrictive would in any way decrease the amount of guns in the hands of criminals?

[KBLEE]

FYI - Dan has created a new Gun Control thread for those of us who might want to debate the topic further. Going forward, let's keep this thread reserved for comments directly related to the CT shooting.

[DanvIllini]

Originally Posted by -josh-

On education in general yes.

Ill make sure we add it to the curriculum next year.

[zoggle101]

Originally Posted by gibb52

Solutions to these problems aren't easy or simple. We all know that. But while we mourn, and while we pray for the victims and their families, there are observations to be made about us as a society.

Many advances in technology bring blessings as well as curses. With the information age IMO we have become a nation of people living alone together. Years ago kids played outside almost every day after school and all summer. Why? There wasn't anything else to do. Your mom kicked your butt outside, and you played. And you learned how to get along with other kids, and certainly how not to get along with some. You acquired conflict resolution skills. Your mom and dad knew their neighbors, because they were outside as well. Talking, visiting, being involved.

Now? We are on the internet as I am now. Our kids play video games ceaselessly, where you can kill 240 people without getting a scratch on you, BTW. Why visit with your neighbor when you can visit with your friends on Facebook? Isn't Twitter and Skype more interesting than the old lady across the street?

We moved a few years ago. When we arrived at our new neighborhood of younger couples I was struck by the isolated nature of my new surroundings. People came home from work, pulled into the garage, the door came down and we didn't see them again until they left for work the next morning. When we did talk to the couple next door I was taken aback by some of the things they said. They didn't know their neighbors. They had lived across the street from somebody for several years and didn't even know their names. How odd to me.

The dual income family has brought a new standard of living to our nation. At a cost. Day care. More separation and isolation. Mom gets home from work, cooks supper, does some laundry, cleans house, helps with homework, etc. When does she have time to know what's going on outside the door? Mom's used to be the lines of communication in the neighborhood. If you smarted off to Mrs. Smith or punched Jimmy Walker your mom knew about it before you got home. We were connected that way. Now we are not.

Kids today have a degree of privacy and independence unheard of just a few years ago. Smart phones bring the internet and levels of communication that most of them aren't ready for. Parents who won't let their 11 yr old kid out of their sight will give them an iphone without hesitation, the modern equivalent of driving them to another state and dropping them off in a crowd of total strangers.

So what's my point? We need to connect. Or re-connect I guess. Know your neighborhood. Be involved in your community. A neighbor with a problem child might be more motivated to get some help if they have the comfort and support of their community.

One more thing. Be a mentor to kids. In any way that you can. Coach a ball team? Good. Youth group at church? Scouts? How about going outside with your kid and getting a neighborhood kickball game going? That odd kid down the street might play and have some fun, might feel better about himself/herself when the day is done.

A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child.

That's my 2 cents worth for the day.

Well said sir.

[sdfidaho]

Originally Posted by Illinoise

Defending your freedom against an intruder is an argument I buy. Defending yourself against a government that is going to disarm the population and install tyranny is not. If you you really believe this is a risk, get in your bunker and when I knock three times its safe to come out.

That's your right to believe that. History proves to me countless times you're incorrect . I don't have, nor want a bunker. I will stand, not hide, for my liberty thank you.

[sdfidaho]

Originally Posted by gibb52
Solutions to these problems aren't easy or simple. We all know that. But while we mourn, and while we pray for the victims and their families, there are observations to be made about us as a society.

Many advances in technology bring blessings as well as curses. With the information age IMO we have become a nation of people living alone together. Years ago kids played outside almost every day after school and all summer. Why? There wasn't anything else to do. Your mom kicked your butt outside, and you played. And you learned how to get along with other kids, and certainly how not to get along with some. You acquired conflict resolution skills. Your mom and dad knew their neighbors, because they were outside as well. Talking, visiting, being involved.

Now? We are on the internet as I am now. Our kids play video games ceaselessly, where you can kill 240 people without getting a scratch on you, BTW. Why visit with your neighbor when you can visit with your friends on Facebook? Isn't Twitter and Skype more interesting than the old lady across the street?

We moved a few years ago. When we arrived at our new neighborhood of younger couples I was struck by the isolated nature of my new surroundings. People came home from work, pulled into the garage, the door came down and we didn't see them again until they left for work the next morning. When we did talk to the couple next door I was taken aback by some of the things they said. They didn't know their neighbors. They had lived across the street from somebody for several years and didn't even know their names. How odd to me.

The dual income family has brought a new standard of living to our nation. At a cost. Day care. More separation and isolation. Mom gets home from work, cooks supper, does some laundry, cleans house, helps with homework, etc. When does she have time to know what's going on outside the door? Mom's used to be the lines of communication in the neighborhood. If you smarted off to Mrs. Smith or punched Jimmy Walker your mom knew about it before you got home. We were connected that way. Now we are not.

Kids today have a degree of privacy and independence unheard of just a few years ago. Smart phones bring the internet and levels of communication that most of them aren't ready for. Parents who won't let their 11 yr old kid out of their sight will give them an iphone without hesitation, the modern equivalent of driving them to another state and dropping them off in a crowd of total strangers.

So what's my point? We need to connect. Or re-connect I guess. Know your neighborhood. Be involved in your community. A neighbor with a problem child might be more motivated to get some help if they have the comfort and support of their community.

One more thing. Be a mentor to kids. In any way that you can. Coach a ball team? Good. Youth group at church? Scouts? How about going outside with your kid and getting a neighborhood kickball game going? That odd kid down the street might play and have some fun, might feel better about himself/herself when the day is done.

A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child.

That's my 2 cents worth for the day.


Well said!

[gibb52]

Originally Posted by Thor015

It's too bad gibb52's post didn't get more attention. I copied it and posted it on my FB page.

On a side note reading the interaction in this thread is saddening. I won't say which side of the argument I am on but will say everyone should re read Gibbs post and re read it again.

Then do something. Go home and find a way to make your community safer and more of a community. And not by banning OR adding guns. Find a way to meet your neighbor or make a local school safer. Make sure to go to a school and find out what they are doing to make the school safer and see how you can help, even if it is monetarily.

If donating to schools, especially to make it safer, isn't a tax write off then push your local officials to make it one.

Thank you for your kind words, Sir.

[zoggle101]

Originally Posted by gibb52

Thank you for your kind words, Sir.

I was surprised also and read it several days ago and shocked there were hardly any replies. Great job Gibbs.

[Illinoise]

Originally Posted by sdfidaho

That's your right to believe that. History proves to me countless times you're incorrect . I don't have, nor want a bunker. I will stand, not hide, for my liberty thank you.

Good luck with your assault on that predator drone with your glock.

[IlliniAmy]

A little interested twist in the Colorado shooting that seems appropriate in the current gun discussion taking place in this thread:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...emark-theater/

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.

Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.

Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater’s entrance.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by KBLEE

Leave it to our president to politicize a prayer service. Despicable...

And again KBLEE shown to be one of the few with a couple cogent thoughts. Honestly when you posted this I thought you were off base. But you were dead on.

But above and below a picture of Obama giving his speech are two links to the donation and video player page. One reads, "Watch this speech." The other reads "http://my.barackobama.com/Newton". Clicking the picture also directs supporters to the video player and donation page.

Obama critic and blogger Jeryl Bier wrote, "Not one, but two buttons - two opportunities to donate to the Obama campaign. Not to the Red Cross, or to a memorial fund for the children and adults killed in Newtown. How hard would it have been to shift the focus, disable the buttons, for just one email, just one blog post? But the show must go on."

http://washingtonexaminer.com/team-o...2#.UNH83m_AexV

[DaytonIllini]

This is pretty well stated.

[bmb777]

when Obama listed the mass shootings, why didnt he include the Fort Hood shootings? could it be because it doesnt fit the typical makeup of a mass shooting?

since rather than a young white male, it was a muslim. and instead of innocent shoppers or innocent children, the victims were innocent American soldiers?