20 elementary school children plus 6 adults shot dead by a guy with a gun

If you listen to what I am suggesting...you will see I am not for MORE gun laws...I am for a unified and sensible law for proper storage of a firearm...do you think I need a 5-7 to be in my nightstand during the day when I am out an about and not even home...NO absolutely not...and do you think when I am not there it is a good idea to leave my completely custom and 1 of a kind 4 barreled shotgun laying around. No ...even to a person who has no intention of hurting anyone, that is 5000 dollars street value they could get simply by breaking a windows now. Yes if someone breaks into your home YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GUNS INSIDE ...who else could be responsible , they guy who obviously doesn't care about the law or another human enough to resist breaking in?

Yes you need to make sure your guns that are not closer to you than anyone else...are unattainable or inoperable. A car is not intended to be a weapon and you can't walk around with a car tucked in your waistband. Nor do you leave your keys in the ignition...A hint ... a friend of mine had his car stolen at a gas station when he was inside buying ciggs...someone hopped in his car and took off...the police couldn't even hold him on charges because the person dropped the car back off at the gas station hours later and stated that he borrowed the car and with the persons id in the car when he stole it...he was able to make believe that he knew the owner of the car....and that was enough manipulation to keep him from catching charges...if he had hurt someone with the car, the officer told him my friend that he would have been responsible and as far as I have looked , it seems that his assessment was accurate. Why... because without the key he couldn't have stolen the car...and exiting the car and leaving the key in the ignition is irresponsible...also note that it is much easier to break into a house (I learned to pick a lock when I was 8 years old because I used to think my desk was a solid place for my keys and lock myself out, yet a grown man would just kick once and be in.) than it is to hot wire a car.

Bars, stores, and alcohol makers are NOT RESPONSIBLE for drinking related deaths...people who make a choice to drink that much are responsible, they make choices that shorten their own lives. They offer a product and people buy it...same as burger king. Budweiser is not a babysitter, and burger king is not a company made up of nutritionists...but you know that when you walk into a package store and choose to grab some licks, and you know that when you go order a king size meal at bk. Those companies are doing openly what the purpose of their business is. However if you go to a bar...and you are WAY past intoxicated and they keep serving you drinks....they CAN be held accountable for your death or partially for damages you cause if you go crash your car when you leave. Alcohol is illegal for minors...if your kids snatch your stash and get loaded and get caught dong something stupid you can be held accountable.

You keep bringing up useless points like I should feel this way about knives or this or that...but you simply are not getting the point of what I am saying....how do you expect people who are scared of guns to respect your view....when you fly off the handle when the suggestion is made that you should lock up any gun that you are not using or is not in a ready to fire mode. That is not taking your freedom...it really is not...in fact you leaving your guns around may end up taking a bunch of peoples freedoms and their lives. Are guns bad...NO, are there bad people...YES, do gun owners need to be more responsible than criminals so that we can prove that WE are not the problem...YES.

I can tell you...I have been shot and I have been stabbed...but both times I promise you it wasn't the weapon that hurt me...it was the lunatic behind them. Alas , I still support owning a firearm.

The only thing your comparison does is prove my point...gun companies are not a problem...neither are citizens who treat their arms with the respect they deserve. No more than BK is responsible for you if you can't help but eat 15 orders of onion rings in a sitting. However, food & alcohol are consumable , your guns are permanent reusable goods which have the capability of doing destruction in the wrong hands...it is your job to keep your guns out of the wrong hands.

Again you are not responsible for the actions of a criminal doing a B&E, but if he can acquire your firearms in seconds because they are stored out in the open and he happens to break in your house...you give him more opportunity for destruction

 

He doesn't bark up the wrong tree, he is only barking.
It is always funny when people just keep repeating freedom, freedom like we are living in a lawless, free for all society. I like to get drunk and drive but the damn police is stopping me from exercising my free right to drink by arresting me. I like to piss in the public place but the socialist government is limiting my freedom.
To have regulation regarding the ownership of a gun is no more limit to freedom than laws that requires people to have a driver license before they drive. Guns are not toys that people like this should be able to buy in order to deal with their insecurity and can feel like a man. It is a serious tool that when not properly used, can endanger the owner and others. There are simple steps that can make the gun ownership more safe for the owner and others these are no more hindering to the freedom than requiring a driving license.
1) Anyone that wants to buy a gun, should have a certificate from a trainer that he is capable of handling a gun and is not going to shoot his own feet or others by accident.
2) Background control should be mandatory so people with mental disorder or a history of violent crimes should not be able to buy guns.
3) You should provide proof that you have a safety box that the gun can be locked up while you are not using it.

The only reason the gun industry and idiots supporting them are fighting these kind of regulations is that they don´t want to limit their sales and money making operation in anyway and they don´t care who gets hurt.

Before our young friend start barking that I hate guns, I should mention that I was in military and have handled more guns and owned more guns that he will ever see in his lifetime but I am man enough not to needed as a penis extender and appreciate the danger and responsibility that comes with owning guns.

 

I really laughed hard there...

See... I think that they (gun makers) fail to realize that if they work deals with safe makers...they can be making money off of merchandise that they are not even making...'buy any of our X line of firearms and get a Y% discount off of a Z branded safe'. Any loses on profits would be offset by profits made on safe sales that they had no overhead on , just for helping promote a specific brand of safes who are eating the mfg cost and a Y% promotional loss while increasing brand recognition and overall sales of their safe units. More manufacturing means more jobs...and in the end everyone is safer from guns getting into the wrong hands.

I see a lot of crazy arguments from both sides of the table and as a responsible gun owner and enthusiast, I can't help but wonder what can be done to keep both of those kinds of people with crazy arguments from having a gun. I am not physically threatened by them...I just feel that when people parade around on a verbal cloud of ignorance and spread the seeds of stupidity, guns or not...the world becomes more dangerous.

I just can't understand why people can't use logic at all sometimes..

 

I am not against responsible gun ownership, gun safes, or any of that. I fully support teaching safe gun practices, and no doubt having a gun safe or other locking device is part of those safe practices. I am simply against legislation that requires the ordinary citizen to jump through more hoops to get weapons. Do you live in Connecticut? If so imagine how someone from Missouri, with little gun restrictions, would be shocked to see such a proposed law about the storage of firearms. If you guys already have a gun waiting period and other restrictions it may not seem like a bad deal, but for me it would be a major hassle. Like you said, if this is a state by state law, that is fine. What works for Connecticut is not necessarily going to work for Missouri. What I don't believe in is federal laws that many states don't want.

 

I agree in a sense that federal law should pretty much pertain to protecting the constitution, and it should be within state rights to create governing laws as it is fit...but then you have to realistically think...
If states could make any law they wanted...you end up with some pretty ridiculous laws.

Check this out....the first entry is from your state (my state has some equally stupid though not quite ridiculous laws as the first one..)...
From my state...
It is against the law in Connecticut for a man to write love letters to a girl whose mother or father has forbidden the relationship.
While not as ridiculous as some of the crazy laws out there...it does pretty much say that a even a single adult woman's love interest could be hooked up on charges if her parents decide they don't like the guy protest and the loving persists. So basically two adult people who are in love can be stopped...brings new meaning to the words...'speak now or forever hold your peace'. People get all huffy and politicians capitalize on the moment and help make irrational laws so they can put something else on their resumé.


But now we are back on to guns...the problem with concluding that gun laws should be on a complete state by state basis is faulted in that stolen arms dealers don't respect geographical boundaries...why would they...they sell hot guns that are used to do dirt for the most part...crossing an imaginary border is not that big of a jump now. And the reason they would move them somewhere else is a simple supply and demand price jump. Guns easy to get somewhere at lower price = profit selling them where it is hard to get them at a higher price. The laws having no uniformity state to state make things like this happen...I mean if I go north and miss the last exit in my state with a legit pistol on me and hit Massachusetts...and I get pulled over...I am going to jail for something as innocent as missing an exit... while at the same time a 15 year old resident of Mass. can possess and carry a firearm.

Certain aspects of gun control should be guided by federal guidelines...and it can be done without removing anyone's constitutional rights...I think anyone without a felony that is a legal adult should be able to own any small caliber firearm...provided they:

• 1: Pass a federal mental stability test at the point before they purchase their first firearm.

• 2: Have no felony arrests, no history of suicide attempts, no usage history of prescribed meds involving mental stability...(someone who needs to medication for someone to be safe in a room for them is not a solid candidate for a gun owner)

• 3: Can furnish 3 recommendation letters stating they are responsible from non relatives that are willing to vouch for your sanity and character.

• 4: Can furnish proof of owning a suitable locking safety storage device

beyond that the states can modify them as they see fit...and tbh there isn't that much a difference between an automatic and a semiautomatic and other than the intimidation factor they really have no reason to be completely illegal and not offer at least a stringent licensing system...the gun is not the problem it is the person responsible for that particular gun.

an example of why automatic vs semiautomatic is a moot point and really people here automatic weapons and get scared...clip size , caliber up to a certain point, action type...none of that matters..
ok now see how fast he reloads...
now look at this guy...(he is one of my favorites...he keeps up with an ak in auto while shooting semi on the same)

besides at the end him using a revolver firing 6 shots, reloading and firing 6 more in less than 3 seconds...imagine a person reloading clips as fast as the first video , and firing at the speed of the second...is there really a difference between auto and semi auto as far as lead down range is concerned

Half of the laws surrounding guns attack small aspects of localized problems...and never touch on the problem behind the acts that startup these laws...which is almost ALWAYS a bad human choice. The guys in the above video dont run around with their guns shooting people...they are respectable people doing something they love. Here is something I have done since I was a child with a shotgun being my first firearm...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx8ZgN1UgT0

Anyways....the constitution wasn't written as a take what you want from it type of writing. It was strikingly vague because they foresaw the need for adaptation as the country experienced growing pains. And you have to remember there is nothing the constitution would ever be interpreted as where it would be granting you rights that extend into taking the explicit rights granted to someone else by the constitution. If you really read the document and want to sum it up in a simplified way...it could be interpreted as..

....play nice and help your fellow human...we don't want to make ridiculous laws and punish everyone else because you can't behave yourself...that is the reason we fought and wrote this document..to secure freedom for all and to prevent any one group from ruling over another...

Would be a shame to have another mass killing and have all sorts of people fly off the handle blaming guns and instead of the horrible people using them for acts of evil all because someone who may have not been a bad guy refused to lock up guns he wasn't engaged with or carrying and one gets stolen and used in an event like sandy hook...people die...he goes to jail...it is just ugly...when the simple fact is if your guns are locked up no one is getting to them...

 

I think this should be considered personal attack and you are trying to infringe on personal liberty and rights of r3dt@rget to own guns, shame on you.

 

That is just too much in my opinion. Obviously, a person should be required to pass a criminal background check. That already exists, but could be strengthened with health history as well. For example a recent history of suicide attempts, certain medications, etc. could disqualify someone. 99% of applicants pass the current background check. Of those 1% that don't only a handful are actually prosecuted for lying on the application. I say up the penalties and prosecutions for lying on the application.

As for #3 and #1, these are completely based on opinions and leaves the decision to one person who reviews the application. Abuse and/or mistakes would be common. The people that grade them could be biased, in a bad mood that day, etc. So someone that could legally own a weapon and is perfectly sane could be rejected based on the feelings of another person.

#4 I think I could compromise on. There is a current law as I mentioned earlier where in some states all guns must be sold with a trigger lock or some sort of locking device. Extending this to the federal level would make sense. Not necessarily gun safes, but all guns must be sold with a mechanism capable of locking the firearm to prevent unauthorized use.

In the end, any type of application system is prone to mistakes and I do not think it would work. But, it makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than the current laws being proposed in congress. And I'm not sure if this was brought up already in this thread, but 60% of gun deaths in the US each year are suicides. Strengthening the mental health aspect of a background check system would be where I recommend starting on responsible laws. Why waste time and effort trying to ban guns with a pistol grip? In NY their big idea was reducing the magazine limit from 10 to 7.

 

If guns needed a locking mechanism then what happens to existing weapons without them?
Requiring a safe, at least, wouldn't require handing in your old weapons.

 

Guns should be kept locked. And loaded. I wish they had something like this for a shotgun, but I haven't been able to find one.

 

I don't understand - you want the NRA to institute mental health programs in the schools? They obviously aren't trained for that, are they?

Aren't SCHOOLS and TEACHERS trained in that area? Don' they get training on recognizing problem kids?

 

lol...

Nice. Pretty good price too.

 

People seem not to realize the system worked in this case, the kid was denied to legally buy a weapon and then proceeded to use his parents weapons, which they are obviously to blame for in not keeping them safely locked away, or realizing their little baby doll son was a fucked up person. Start charging parents for manslaughter/murder for being fucking idiots. And this kid never had a semi-automatic weapon, he killed innocent children with handguns like sitting ducks in a classroom. Literally. Even more strict gun laws won't prevent stupid ass parents.

 

I agree with the sentiment of people being held accountable for their actions , but for all intensive purposes a pistol can a semi-auto arm. All semi automatic means is that you get one shot for one pull of the trigger...and indeed the sig sauer and the glock he used were both semi auto. But in the end it doesn't matter...the kind of gun you have does not make a difference...the only thing that can be done is for people to be more responsible for themselves and those that they influence.

 

Special Report: Firearm Facts -- the AR-15

touch.wtnh.com/20000/5575927

Watch, read and enjoy.

 

Very well said.

 

Anyone else hear about the ABC interview with Michelle O. about automatic weapons that was "cut for time"....?

It's amazing how blatant the media is now...

 

Since the NewTown tragedy, as reported by Slate magazine from news reports submitted to it via folks around the nation 2363 Americans have died via gunshots in the 50 states: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

In other words more Americans have been shot to death since 12/14/12 than the number of American soldiers who have been killed in the war in Afghanistan which has been going on for over a decade.

The US military takes better care of its soldiers in a war, than Americans are willing to take care of its own civilians. In the UK here are some statistics on the topic relating to 2010:

On February 26, Sebastian Swartz a nine year old accidentally died from a gun shot wound to the head while playing with his fathers gun: http://www.fox19.com/story/21388316/sebastian-swartz-9-dies-from-injuries-in-accidental-shooting

Meanwhile, as argued in this forum, the NRA and its most radical extremist supporters support state legislation which would go so far as to penalize a pediatrician for asking if a family has a gun.

I repeat: the most radical supporters of the NRA and gun legislation would penalize a doctor if they ASKED A QUESTION if a family owns a gun. The radical supporters of this legislation insist that asking the question is an intrusion and for doing that a pediatrician should face severe penalties.

In light of this tragedy in Decatur, Ohio, I wonder if the supporters of that type of legislation, which the NRA supports and is pushing in various state legislatures, would reconsider their stance.

 

Yes those damn NRA members. They are worried about protecting peoples privacy and 2nd amendment rights, while the Democrats are worried about semi-automatic rifles and magazine sizes. At least the NRA is doing its job, advocating for the 2nd amendment and maximum personal freedom. Congress, especially the Democrats, are not doing anything about the statistic you mentioned. They introduce a bill that will not impact your number at all, while their allies in different state and city governments pass similar bills that will do nothing to reduce that number. So I ask you, why do you care so much about what the NRA is doing, and less about what your congressmen and congresswomen are doing? Please tell all the Democrats you know to support a complete repeal of the 2nd amendment. That way in 2014 America will vote them all out of office and we can get down to business.

 

Broken record.