Connecticut 'gunman dead' after US school shooting

[MH]

Just get as much guns as you can off the streets and make it difficult as possible to acquire permit.
Just from the statistic point of view such incidents will happen less often.
IF i recall most of the rage shootings had been done with legal guns owned by the shooters or family members , the gun enthusiasts who own guns/assault rifles for the heck of it.
I never digged into this but that is how i remember some of those incidents that reached the news here.
Or have the freedom to defend your self and/or shoot each other.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by MH

Just get as much guns as you can off the streets and make it difficult as possible to acquire permit.
Just from the statistic point of view such incidents will happen less often.
IF i recall most of the rage shootings had been done with legal guns owned by the shooters or family members , the gun enthusiasts who own guns/assault rifles for the heck of it.
I never digged into this but that is how i remember some of those incidents that reached the news here.
Or have the freedom to defend your self and/or shoot each other.

In cities that they've done the above, get guns off the street, strong gun laws, hasn't done a thing but insure only criminals are armed.

[August]

Originally Posted by MH

Just get as much guns as you can off the streets and make it difficult as possible to acquire permit. Just from the statistic point of view such incidents will happen less often.

Except that from the statistical point of view the opposite is true. We've never had tougher gun control laws than we do now yet these incidents seem to be occurring with greater and greater frequency. If your theory were right they should be decreasing.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by August

Except that from the statistical point of view the opposite is true. We've never had tougher gun control laws than we do now yet these incidents seem to be occurring with greater and greater frequency. If your theory were right they should be decreasing.

On the other hand, most first-world countries have far more restrictive gun controls in the US than there are now, and yet their incidence of violent crime is orders lower and statistically decreasing.

Though as I said in discussions on this topic before, what I think that actually points to is that the problem isn't anything to do with guns at all. It's a much wider cultural issue and reducing it to a gun control debate of "guns or no guns" is not the right approach.

Also, I find reducing this topic to "guns or no guns" extremely sad considering what actually transpired. It just shows that though the shootings keep happening, nobody learns anything. Instead, it just turns into a politicized back-and-forth, left-vs-right debate that does nothing to address the underlying cultural problems behind this. And people are willing to drop their sensitivity to this sort of thing in favour of easy political labels.

[August]

Originally Posted by CCIP

On the other hand, most first-world countries have far more restrictive gun controls in the US than there are now, and yet their incidence of violent crime is orders lower and statistically decreasing.

Says you but the International Crime Victims Survey says otherwise:

Says you but the International Crime Victims Survey says otherwise:

No it doesn't.

1.yet their incidence of violent crime is orders lower and statistically decreasing.
2.overall victimisation for 10 crimes.
So violent crime is put up and you decide that to counter the point you shall include "theft of a bicycle" as one of 10 crimes.

But maybe it was a violent theft of a bicycle

[Cybermat47]

America should have stronger gun laws right now. All you need for self-defence is a handgun, and yet this person was using a civilian assault rifle.

[August]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

America should have stronger gun laws right now. All you need for self-defence is a handgun, and yet this person was using a civilian assault rifle.

Would you feel better if he had committed his crimes with a shotgun?

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

America should have stronger gun laws right now. All you need for self-defence is a handgun, and yet this person was using a civilian assault rifle.

What about hunting? You do realize that the majority of game in the USA is controlled by hunters, if it weren't so, numerous animal populations would overpopulate. Not to mention millions of Americans hunt for food. For instance, even with hunting the deer population in NC can get so high, hunters are given extra tags. Once it got so high the concern was starvation and disease would wipe the entire population. The 223 is really nothing more than a hunting rifle with a bigger clip.

A person could easily walked in there with two cut off auto shotguns and done as much damage, so I assume we should get rid of those? Millions of people prefer shotguns for protection, because you'll probably hit something while shaking.

The big issue seems to be clip size, say from 30 down to 10. I don't have a problem with that, I can switch out a clip in about 3-5 seconds.

What you don't see in the news is the millions of Americans that protect themselves yearly from criminals and stop further crimes because they're armed.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

America should have stronger gun laws right now.

On the other hand many people who want stronger gun laws want to ban handguns and leave rifles alone.

Some will argue that the only gun law that will work would be the absolute banning of all guns, period. That might be difficult in a country in which close to 40% of all households contain at least one gun.

All you need for self-defence is a handgun, and yet this person was using a civilian assault rifle.

So? Who says all you need is a handgun? Who says you need a gun at all? I could argue that all you need for self-defense is a good knife. Others have argued that all you need is a good police force.

On the other hand many such crimes have been committed with handguns. I had a friend who owned several of each, and he never shot anybody. I own a rifle, and I haven't shot anybody.

[Fish]

[QUOTE=August;1976748]Says you but the International Crime Victims Survey says otherwise:

I think thats a non sequitur.

http://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/pdffiles/ICVS2004_05.pdf

[MH]

Originally Posted by August

Except that from the statistical point of view the opposite is true. We've never had tougher gun control laws than we do now yet these incidents seem to be occurring with greater and greater frequency. If your theory were right they should be decreasing.

Maybe. I'm misinformed but I heard that in last twenty years or so the laws had been relaxed in many states...not that they had been ever hard on people by my understanding....
I guess its all relative....

Maybe. I'm misinformed but I heard that in last twenty years or so the laws had been relaxed in many states...not that they had been ever hard on people by my understanding....

its just another conservative dream about a non existant past which is used to try and avoid reality. Just on the concealed carry issue the number of no restictions states has quadrupled the shall issue states have nearly quadrupled and the no issue states are now pretty much non existant. From everything covering such a wide range as parks cities pistols assault rifles the laws have been relaxed not tightened, also with the rash ofexceptionally crazy castle laws the restrictrions on just shooting people have been relaxerd as well.
But the message is still "laws are now tougher than they have ever been" so swallow the spin from august MH

In cities that they've done the above, get guns off the street, strong gun laws, hasn't done a thing but insure only criminals are armed.

Name a single city that has ensured that only criminals are armed with its laws?
You should be able to come up with an example of a city as you did use the plural so there must be more than one city you can choose from.

Unless of course there isn't a single city in the states that has ever done so

[eddie]

Several years ago, there was a school shooting in California, the shooter used an assault rifle. After, California banned assault rifles, but the killings didn't slow down, because they just used other guns. Now, the assault rifle ban out there, is so watered down, it doesn't look like they banned them in the first place.