In response to ricky12684's comment:

Neither, if the attacker is a suicidal lunatic. Presumably he planned to kill himself regardless of the body count.

The deterrence factor only works with sane people and sane people don't do this kind of stuff.

I'll take this a step further.  I am more than happy to have a conversation about some of these video games.  Apparently the kid was a gamer, and if he had a history of mental illness, I wonder if these games contributed to his warped mind. 

In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

I agree with you that if there was gun control, a black market, like the availability of drugs, would provide a crazy with weapons.

It is too bad to an extent that these loonies shoot themselves or are shot. I'd like a tranquilizer weapon or shoot the limbs etc. to keep the person alive so that his/her brain could be analyzed to see if something could be learned to prevent others from committing these tragedies. And "no" I would not want liberals etc. claiming that insanity keeps this vile creature from being killed, tortured even !!!

As much as I am excited about the upcoming game vs 49ers & Pats & the Celtics mediocrity, this event puts into perspective that life is sacred & we must count each day as a blessing. There are somber days ahead  & will be too over the holidays with the massacre of innocent children. I  cannot imagine the grief of parents/grandparents. Why would God allow this ??? How to explain to the other Kids other than telling them they are all going to heaven & some are going earlier that others I guess ? Sort of like some Muslims believing they are going up to 72 Virgins so it is not the worst thing. I do not even think child psychologists have good counseling advice for pre-teen children as there are no precedents. Got to tell the kids that there are many evil people in the world. The many crazies in the world is truly frightening !!!

 

In response to ricky12684's comment:

In Israel Teachers have assault rifles to protect students,if this was case in U.S.we would be a lot safer.Unfortunately evil lurks in the hearts of people.

 

Full disclosure, I own guns. A Glock among them. Nothing crazy like an AK or AR, I don't see the need personally.  Guns are fun and protection for me. I consider myself sane (some may disagree...).  

That said, we either accept that there will be guns or we decide to take them away from everybody.  No sloganeering here, but the bad guys will always get their hands on guns or other weaponry, there's no way around that. So we either protect ourselves or we take our chances.  I prefer to be armed.  I respect anybody who chooses to do without. But if we take guns away from everybody (and I'd like to see how they would do that), then we're all sitting ducks.

You can rail against it all you want, but the only way to protect against the sort of stuff that happened yesterday is to arm more sane people and eliminate the bassackward policy of making schools (and movie theaters and shopping malls and office buildings) gun free zones. Who does that protect?  It just prevents the people who might actually be able to do something from being able to do anything, other than run and pray.  

The other alternative is armed guards at every one of these places, which isn't feasible. Frankly it makes more sense to arm teachers and train them how to kill. That may offend your sensibilities, but my sensibilities are far more offended by what happened in CT.

If someone breaks into my house at night and they get past the dog, they're probably going to die. So I would imagine if they knew that they would go elsewhere. It's no different at an elementary school. If they know the staff there is armed and dangerous, they'd probably move on to some more enlightened gun free zone. 

 

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

They dont want teachers armed with guns - fine...Pepper spray canisters are non lethal and will stop an attacker.

In response to RockScully's comment:

I think your statements are completely rational and I agree with them. Let's be honest: No one expects a loony to walk into an elementary school like that and kill little kids. It's just a shame that this even has to be discussed.

But, that said, it's high time schools start budgeting for basic security.  It stinks, but it's clear it needs to be done.   This little gutless turd wouldn't have gotten through if there was security there.

One more reason to make sure marijuana is legal in every state. Take the revenue and tax from that and commit it to these kinds of improvements in schools.

 

[/QUOTE]

I agree re security, just wonder about the cost prohibitiveness of securing all those public buildings in an era of budget cuts and such.  If weed helps, well I guess some good might come from folks getting high.  Not sure if it's the best solution for our national competitiveness, but that's a separate discussion...

In response to ccsjl's comment:

OK, or stun guns. At least something more lethal than a yardstick.

This post has been removed.

This post has been removed.

In response to RockScully's comment:

No argument here, I'm libertarian.  I could care less if folks want to get high and if the government can balance the budget on them, more power to 'em.  I feel the same way about gambling. Should be casinos (with sports books) in every major city. Folks are going to gamble, why not collect taxes on it? I don't smoke weed, but I'd place a bet every now and then if it was accessible.  

 

In response to RockScully's comment:

You know your insults do you no favors. 

Neither am I a gun control enthusiast or a gamer hater.  But if the point is to have a conversation, then lets bring it all up.  

 

This post has been removed.

I guess I don't understand why Americans think that the only answer to gun crime is more guns.  Based on the experience of most other Westernized nations, gun control actually does work.  It's like everyone in America has their heads in the sand.   

Not to single out Muzwell, but he articulated the American attitude so clearly here:

You can rail against it all you want, but the only way to protect against the sort of stuff that happened yesterday is to arm more sane people and eliminate the bassackward policy of making schools (and movie theaters and shopping malls and office buildings) gun free zones. Who does that protect?  It just prevents the people who might actually be able to do something from being able to do anything, other than run and pray.  

  The experience of the rest of the Western world, however, points to the complete opposite.  If you make the most lethal firearms hard to get, there is less gun violence.  It is true that gun control can't completely erase deadly violence.  But from experience elsewhere, effective gun control certainly can reduce the amount of it.  When a crazy 20 year old can easily get his hands on three or four high-capacity, portable, quick-shooting firearms, there's a problem.  These guns may not need to be completely banned, but they shouldn't be as easily available as they are in the US.  I mean why in the world did Adam Lanza's mother have two high-capacity pistols and a Bushmaster rifle in her house in Newtown?  Even if she was worried about violent home invaders (a nutty fear in Newtown), one of those guns would have been enough.  It's just crazy that she had that much fire power on hand.  And the hard truth, if she was worried about defending herself from violent invaders, it didn't work, did it? Her son was the violent invader and he used her own guns against her.             

Complex Issue  ...

For the record :

I believe that gun ownership in general should NOT be banned .

IMO -The right for an American to possess a firearm ( an American with a non-violent  , non- felonious criminal history  , w/o documented mental health issues ) should be sacra cent .

HOWEVER  - No one should legally be allowed to obtain a semi-automatic assault rifle.

Also - I'm not sure a person should be allowed to squirrel away an arsenal of weapons - I understand the desire to protect your family - but realistically , who needs a half dozen guns or more to do it ?

Lastly - 

Gun ownership needs to be far more strictly policed - both in the purchasing and with frequent and stringent record updating of anyone who is licensed to own .

I'm sure that most members of the NRA generally want fair gun control laws -

But as far as NRA leadership goes -

I have no doubt that the tools at the top are more concerned with maintaining the status quo than helping solve America's gun problem .

So...

F the NRA .

 

PS - To all you numb-skulls out there comparing automobile accident victims with those murdered by gun violence ...

Just Stop It .

It's pathetic and ignorant .

More importantly it does a grave disservice to the bloody corspes of gun violence .

In response to RockScully's comment:

Its no more weak than the gun control argument.  I frankly have no issue with the games just as I don't have a problem with guns.  I do have a problem with these things being in the wrong peoples, hands, but until we legislate and enforce that (tongue in cheek) we'll simply continue to have people advocating for things they can't change. 

In response to ccsjl's comment:

Screw pepper spray, hornet spray shoots farther and will blind.  Always have hornet spray close by!

 

Okay, damnit!!  Why do we have to have these talks on here.  There are two things that get more heated then anything else... Politics and religion!!  DO not talk about these things if you don't want all hell to break loose.

As far as gun control goes.. We all have rights to bare arms, and this should never change!! Now I am open to what type of guns should be allowed to own, semi automatics... probably not and I have no problem making these illegal.  Someone give me a good reason why a semi automatic gun should be legal.  As far as handguns, rifles and shot guns, they are fine.

Just a side note about hand guns and personal protection.  Re-think owning a glock or clip type gun for personal protection.  Those guns can jam and nothing could be worse then a gun jamming when you are defending yourself or your family.  A revolver won't jam, make this type gun as your personal protection.  If you like that a glock or clip type gun carries more bullets, then get a second revolver!  You are welcome!!

This post has been removed.

I forgot to say, God Bless those parents and families in Newton, Conn.  What a terrible thing.  As a parent this really bothers me.

Prolate, you can single me out if you like I can take it.  As I mentioned I don't see a need to own anything exotic or unusual. But a Glock (or a Sig or similar) is what the bad guys have.  They're very common. Again, we can deal in fantasy or in reality.  The reality is these guns aren't going anywhere. They just aren't.  If we could wave a wand and they never existed, I'd wave the wand myself. But the genie is out of the bottle.  Given that, I'm doing what I have to to protect myself and my family.

Someone said let's give the teachers pepper spray, I said stun guns. Anything is better than what they have now (yardsticks and maybe a laser pointer?).

If you want to discuss limiting access to fully automatic weapons or military stuff, I have no problem with that discussion. 

In response to RockScully's comment:

I agree with this.  I know states are broke but this needs to happen.  A gun toting security officer at all schools!

This post has been removed.

In response to RockScully's comment:

The latest report I heard was the boy was 20 years old, he was denied purchasing a gun a few days ago and the guns he used was his mothers.  Now I don't know how try this is but that is the most recent report I have heard.  Why the mother owned a semi automatic gun, idk.  Maybe to protect herself from her scum-bag son.