https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politi...ates_over_time

The number of times the Democrats held power and did nothing.

https://www.google.cz/search?dcr=0&e....0.8s0QyvHEwFw

Most Americans want more control of guns. The gun lobby, which pays politicians, don't. Guess which sides win?

Americans, on this subject, display the vast difference in culture on guns.

The only long-term solution is to take guns away from the general public. It will take decades because it's a problem that has built over decades.

Lockdown schools and the shooting move to other locations.

Mental health can't protect everyone. Even in countries where the best mental health care is available, people still develop problems. Without anyone raising the alarms, without those who suddenly decide to go out in a suicide and take as many with them.

Going back to the Arms that were available when the Constitution was written is a sensible argument. Within a society as violent as America. True it won't 100% solve the problem, but it will solve it a lot more than the tinkering Americans propose.

Do you believe the Secon Amendment would have been written, as it is if they had known then what gun technology would deliver?

https://pigsquash.files.wordpress.co...il-in-1787.jpg

Top 10 AR-15 Rifles 2014

School shootings didn't happen until after violent video games made their debut. Why isn't the video game industry being blamed for these school shootings? Is a 17+ rating adequate?

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....AC_SL1500_.jpg

to be fair mental illness happens in 100% of these mass shootings as well. nobody sane and level headed are shooting up schools en mass clearly. Unless you believe people are doing these for no other reason than convenience?

Because then that might to lead to Hollywood and their violent movies getting some of the blame.

The out-of-touch Hollywood elites (with their gate secured homes and armed guards) want to be able to look virtuous by calling for gun control for the lowly masses on the one hand while producing their movies full of gun violence for the lowly masses on the other.

:2 cents:



.

The problem is utterly simple.

Kids in the US play first person shooter games such as Call Of Duty. (I play COD nearly every day, have for years.) In such games they have access to high end weapons. They see these weapons in COD, in the movies, and they think that all of this is cool.

You can argue that kids around the world play such games, and they do. The difference is at age eighteen an American kid can go out and purchase a fucking AR-15.

In the debate on armed security guards, someone said they have this in Israel at ALL of the schools. And this is true. However, the armed security guards aren't there to stop mass shooters, but instead to prevent acts of terror. From what I've read about Israel, EVERYONE goes through firearms training yet it's very difficult to get a firearm for personal use. The age restriction to own a firearm in Israel is twenty-seven years old.

Just at random, I pulled information for firearms in France. It seems getting a firearm in France is difficult.

The root problem here is very simple - We are handing out assault weapons to eighteen year old kids ONLY because they want one.

yes on the other hand having your head sawed off in public is pretty easy to get involved with so there is always a trade off :thumbsup

Then why do these shooting happen only in America?

It goes deeper than that. A society that has a large proportion of people, that believes a gun is the answer. Removing guns from the general public is the only way. Someone has to prove they have a license to own a dog, drive a car, fly a plane, etc. But anyone can buy a gun. :upsidedow

honestly the only thing around here that seems to be utterly simple is..... like you got your gun when you were 18?

Societal illness.

:2 cents:



.

Tell that to Timothy Mcveigh...or the 9-11 terrorists

Truth. Crazies should not have guns. Period. But without guns some of them may become more motivated to look into bomb making techniques and other forms mass killing.



.

this is not an argument.

because you can kill someone with a hammer does not mean you have to give them
even more dangerous stuff.

what did change since 9/11 ?
how hard is it today to fly and what a mess are security controls.

and believe me they WOULD forbid to fly if there would be an alternative.

planes are NECESSARY and there is no way to go around that. WHERE is the NEED for a gun?

i mean all numbers you see wherever tell you the same story. why can´t you just accept that USA is the country with the most gun homicides and mass killers.

in all history not even a fraction of americans have been killed from terrorists as from other americans. 9/11 is a big deal for you? ok why are the 100 thousand what got killed since then from other americans are not a big deal ?

in what kind of world you want to live when people seriously discussing to secure kids in schools with the army just because too many people use their right to have a weapon to kill other people ????

you prohibit to smoke a cigarette even outside because it COULD possibly kill someone - so why do you not expect killing from a gun ?

what a fuck is going on in minds what even THINK about such a nonsense ?

there are many many many examples of countries with very restricted laws and they do NOT have the problem - so WHAT other prove do you need for that?

tell me: and for WHAT needs an intelligent person a gun ???

a very simple question to test your Logic, pick A or B. which will stop a school shooting tomorrow?

A. another debate on gun regulations tonight
B. put national guard presence at all vulnerable schools in the morning

so this isn't a trick question ... A or B?

1) Hunting.
2) Pest control.
3) Sport shooting.
4) Protection.



.

B now - no doubt- but that should not replace A and hopefully C as a result from A.

well every gun controlled country have hunters. but you nee a licence for that and it will not only take you a LOOOONG time in school - you will be also tested on your character - and if the is the SMALLEST doubt - no hunting
i don´t know what kind of "pest" you have in your country but we control that without guns

also fine - but with the nearly the same restrictions as the hunter.
and than you lave your gun in the sport center locked and you can go whenever you want there a shot as many holes as you want in a piece of paper.

protecting from OTHER PEOPLE WITH A GUN ????
so you buy guns because the other one have a gun.

than it would be a good idea if no one have a gun and rely in the police.

and sure - if you a a money transport driver or need protection for another good reason see: the hunter.

this is the way it is done in all those countries with homicide rates 99% less than in US.

and as you see IT WORKS !

I live in a country that actually still has wildlife unlike your country where you have killed it all off.



I live in a gun controlled country and sport shooter's guns are not locked up in the sport centre. They are permitted to carry them back and forth to the sport centre and keep them locked up in their home. Technically nothing to stop any one of them from going nuts one day and going on a shooting rampage.


So people only commit crimes with guns? What if someone comes at you with a knife? Or are you going to fight him off with another knife, if you have one? Your fists? Your purse? Or would you rather have a gun?

What about an unarmed man simply being able to overpower a woman and rape her? No weapons involved? Do you expect her to fight back only by clawing, kicking and screaming? Or would she be much more able to save herself with a gun?

And if you ban guns for everybody the criminals will still have guns because they're criminals and they don't follow laws to begin with.

A gun ban in the US will lead to a sharp increase in crime guaranteed.



.

Well it would be B of course BUT (also starts with a 'B') define 'vulnerable schools'.

Inner city schools?
Rich white suburbs?
An immediate threat, an ongoing one or a possible one?

I am in agreement with your views on this subject. I just don't think there's enough National Guard units to protect even half the 'vulnerable schools' in this country. As far as I see it every school (and school age child) is vulnerable in this counry. :(

The President said in his speech that he does NOT want to have armed guards in uniforms all over our schools. It would no longer feel like school and more like a military camp.

His idea was to have a way to allow those teachers and coaches who have experience with firearms and already own them anyway allowed to CONCEAL CARRY on campus.

For instance, that coach in this latest incident. He loved those kids so much that he jumped in front of them and was shot to death saving them. Now imagine if he had his firearm holstered on his side under his shirt.
He could have went on the offensive as opposed to simply dying by taking bullets.

I think that it's a pretty good idea.
I ALSO think that schools need to "harden" up in other ways as well.

Whenever I would go to my kids school...I parked my car, walked onto campus, walked into the school, walked down the hallway to the office where I "checked in" and they gave me a stick on name tag.

That means I COULD have had a gun and just walked right in and started shooting.

How about student ID cards with bar-codes on them. And an entrance at the front where all the students come in through a turnstile swiping their cards as they enter.
And any parents visiting the school would be stopped right there to show ID, walk through a metal detector, and THEN get a pass to go on to school grounds.

Arming teachers no but your ideas at the end, YES. :thumbsup

Oh lol a survivor of the shooting tweeted that AR15s should be called "Marco Rubio's" because they are easy to buy...

What a burn LOL

I'm still not sure how I feel about armed teachers, but I like the idea of having all the doors lock and having the kids have ID badges they have to swipe to get into the building so all guests must enter through the main entrance. Hell, half the places I have worked during my life had a similar system.

so than tell what the difference is between usa and canada.
are canadians less crazy ? if yes another reason to take the americans the guns away.

in germany we do not have a speed limit on motorways - but we do not have a problem because drivers are trained and streets are good. IF that would be a problem - believe me germany would not be the last country in the world who does not have a general speed limit.

nobody looks here for a solution for a not existing problem - that is a big difference.

i think the answer is easy to answer with a contra question.
how many people you think would this school shooter be able to kill with a knife ?
and would he have dared to go in there with a knife and face hundreds of students?
have you seen this midget? 3 girls would take his knife away and kick his ass.

you will always find situations where you can say "it would habe been better if.."
also there are weapons what are not made to kill someone. gas sprays and
shockers and much more. but believe me - in such a situation would the victim not be able to find the gas or shocker in her handbag same as she does not find the gun.

so also NO good argument

no they will not - they also don´t do it in countries with gun control.
and even with this argument there are 99% less people killed.

you are probably right in that and this is the price they pay for centuries of misunderstanding the word "right"

but on the longer view it will change. and a lot of excuses can not be used anymore
(like: I thought he was a housebreaker).

and a lot of killings what happen in this "switchoff moments" where people are killing
without thinking just because they HAVE a gun in the near would not happen anymore.

i mean there are existing examples of a similar situation in england and even numbers from switzerland what had once the most liberal weapon law in europe.

there "NSA" and the people who did not want to give up their rights had the exact arguments as you have.
today, after they went this step, england is one of the countries with the less homicides in the whole world and even when switzerland had not such a problem (probably similar to canada) the homicides went down DRASTIC.

so how many more examples you need.
it works everywhere. show me ONE country in the world where it does NOT work.

i think apart from the fact that a school massacre can also be done when they come out from school we do not have to forget all other cases.
what about the church ? also close it and set guards inside?
what about the las vegas killer ? how do you want to protect the people what are killed from inside to outside?

if you compare this problem with drugs - you should allow to produce an import drug because the drugs are not the problem then. the people who take it are the problem.

i don´t know why you people are not able to think just logic in that matter.

Nobody is saying to "arm the teachers". But the percentage of teachers and coaches who are ALREADY licensed to carry a firearm...it seems foolish to NOT have them carrying their weapons with them in case of a madman entering the school.

I graduated in 1979. And in my highschool in central Florida, all the guys who drove pickup trucks had their gun racks in the back window of their trucks with loaded rifles in them. Right there in the parking lot of the school.
But nobody was shooting up schools then. It wasn't a "gun free zone" like it is now.

I think that's the argument being made for having the 10 to 20 percent of all teachers and coaches who already have hand guns being allowed to "conceal carry" in the school.
It no longer is an easy and soft target.

As I said, when I was in highschool this kind of thing didn't happen. Anybody that tried that would have been killed pretty quick.

BUT...now that killers KNOW that a school is a "gun free zone", it makes it a "Soft target".

You don't see many people walking into a gun show convention, or a police dept. and shooting the place up...they KNOW they will get shot back at.

The President pointed out that these killers are cowards at heart. They don't go after "Hard targets"...only soft ones. And schools are pretty damn soft these days.

Anyway, that's an argument being made by the President.
The only other way to stop this would be to repeal the second amendment, confiscate all guns, and then give it another 40 or 50 years for ALL the guns to finally be gone.

By that time...we will have a lot more school shootings taking place.

Why not simply harden them up NOW and put a stop to it. Then everybody can talk and talk in Washington D.C. about "gun control". (because that's all they ever do is talk)

The American Dream.


https://preview.ibb.co/kN8hTH/guns.jpg

Do any of you shit-4-brainzes realize that choking was the 4th leading cause of unintentional injury death in 2017? By far, the leading culprit in these unfortunate incidents is food. I need not tell you the obvious solution to this very deadly problem. But I will anyway:

BAN FOOD.

There. I said it. And if you disagree with me, you're a Trump supporter and probably a racist too.

I guess I just feel like teachers having guns may be a road to nowhere. Even if it works and it keeps people from shooting up schools, do we not think they will just switch to softer targets like shopping malls, grocery stores, churches etc.

To me, we need to do two things. We need to increase security in some way to make it harder for the shooters to carry out their deeds and we need to look at how we sell guns, who we sell them to, and what kind of guns they are. I think if we don't at least try to address the root of the problem we are just going to shift the problem to a different location.

It's a big problem that is going to be difficult to solve. I agree these shootings don't just take place at schools but we can increase school security which is one step in the right direction. Until we look at the root cause of this and address how to best keep mentally ill people away from guns we aren't going to solve the problem across the board. As I said in my other post, my worry is that if we lock down schools and make then secure, those shooters will just move to other places.

That's fine but not all of them show warning signs. It's easy to say get them mental heath care, but do you have any idea how hard it is to get someone committed? Are we going to go around locking up every person who goes a little nuts or acts strange?

Even if the cops had arrested this kid prior for threats, at best they could hold him for 24 to 48hrs and then what? If he didn't do anything they can't keep him ,locked up..

Even if he were to be put on some ban list for background checks, that only cover ccw's and pistols.. He can still buy a rifle, shot gun, assault rifle or buy from some adverage Joe selling his gun face to face..

That's possible...but most places are already much more "hard" than schools are.
And even though I think ALL human life is valuable...there is something that is especially hard-hitting when it's children being shot.

I would say that any and every place that is a "gun-free zone" is a soft target for these monsters.
When they put those signs up at public places that say "Gun Free Zone", it's like waving a red flag in front of a bull if you think about it.

I was thinking about this discussion last night. I stopped in at a bar here in Vegas to have a couple of drinks and watch a band for a few minutes.
And I noticed that one of the guys sitting at the bar was open-carrying a loaded 9mm pistol in a holster on his hip.

I spoke to him at the bar, he was a retired Marine and was licensed to carry that firearm.

I don't really worry too much about anything...not one of those kinds of people who are scared everywhere they go. I can handle myself physically if it comes to that.
But I do have to say...that marine sitting there with that pistol on his hip made me feel even more secure.
NOBODY was going to come walking into that bar shooting the place up.
It's a bar that is well known here in Vegas that it is frequented by people carrying guns.

Unlike that gay bar in Orlando where the shooter KNEW he was gonna be free to do as he pleased...people in Vegas KNOW they will get their asses shot if they try that in bars in this town.

I know that's off-topic somewhat, just wanted to share it.

I too think all life is valuable, but when kids get shot it is more devastating.

Maybe we need to focus on schools first and see what happens then deal with things as they come up. Personally, I think if we are going to find a long-term solution to this we are going to have to come up with some kind of combination of laws/mental health and security. As I told a friend of mine the other day, the idea is that you put a fair amount of hurdles in place that people have to jump to buy a gun. The hope is that every hurdle is another chance for someone to catch the person who is ill and keep them from buying the gun or it gives the ill person more time to think and maybe change their mind. I don't know exactly how to go about those and what those hurdles are, but I feel like increased security isn't going to be enough.

Thinking like that is why nothing ever gets done.:disgust

Why? Because it would solve the problem? Or reduce it 1000%?

Nothing is being done NOW except more blah blah blah.

Hey, higher prices means higher profits so gun manufacturers should love this idea. Who wouldn't want to sell a product that costs 10K? There's nothing in the Constitution that says gun prices have to be affordable. There's yer loophole folks. Exploit it and stop the madness.

We're probably a little less crazy. Maybe the climate. :1orglaugh

But the US has 10x the population of Canada so, yes, there are bound to be more crazy people. They just have to do a better job keeping the guns away from them.


Knife-wielding attackers kill 29, injure 130 at China train station

You'll notice that nobody "took away their knives and kicked their ass".

Sure, it was 10 attackers but I bet you a couple of guns in the crowd would have greatly cut down on the casualties.

Anyways. That's not the point and we're not talking about a kid attacking a school with a knife are we? If you're walking down the street at night and three thugs come at you with a knife what are you going to do? Hope that Batman comes to save you? Good luck.


So then tell me - how do you plan to get the guns away from the criminals and keep them out of their hands?


Murder and homicide rates before and after gun bans


Anyways, it's pointless to argue this with you.

But good luck on your crusade to take guns away from Americans.




.

Also keep this in mind...even without guns, England is the most violent country in all of Europe:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/...77_468x636.jpg

thommy, read this story:

https://www.pe.com/2018/02/20/charge...et-homeowners/


So you would be happier that these two elderly people potentially end up murdered to fulfill your desire that they be denied guns?




.

Guns are not a problem. The guy who pulls the trigger on civilians is. You know that semi-automatic guns are freely sold almost everywhere? In South America, Canada, Russia the EU countries etc. But only in the USA these guns are being used for mass shooting. And for some unknown reason Americans prefer to do that in the schools. What's wrong with you, guys?

I can visit any online shop and one of these is mine for less than $500 USD: https://оружие59.рф/catalog/weapons/shotgun/izhmash/

But... I don't need it. I feel secure w/o any gun in my house.

^^^ Yep.

Guns are only a problem in the hands of criminals.

Now if only someone could ban criminals.




.

This actually is being taken out of context. First of all, Trump rescinding the bill hasn't taken effect yet. Is the entire system messed up? Yes. Does it rest, solely, on the Democrats or Republicans side? No. It is the entire system. Even if this law, which hadn't of taken effect yet, were in place, this kid slipped through a faulty system. The FBI neglected to respond to multiple warnings. The local county sheriff department refused to respond to 18 warnings about him in a single year. The school district tried to have him baker acted but the doctor at the mental health facility found it unnecessary. The police responded to 39 calls for 911 help at the house regarding this kid but never arrested him. The list is quite long of how this kid slipped through the cracks. In all of this, I hope both parties see they need to work together instead of grandstanding and, pandering to special interest groups. Common sense measures should have been taken after Columbine, 19 years ago. Bill Clinton was in office then.

quote from the article:

Looking across countries, it would then falsely appear that stricter gun control resulted in higher crime. Economists refer to this as an ?endogeniety? problem. The adoption of the policy is a reaction to other events (that is, ?endogenous?), in this case crime. To resolve this, one must examine how the high-crime areas that chose to adopt the controls changed over time ?not only relative to their own past levels but also relative to areas that did not institute such controls.

Why then do you support a sick society being given access to powerful weapons?

This debate isn't about stopping the terrorist.

We agree on this. :thumbsup

Criminals don't shoot up schools, malls, churches, etc. This is about stopping mass shooting where until it starts the perpetrator isn't classed as a criminal.

Are convicted criminals allowed to buy guns?