Three days later and I'm still madder than hell about the senseless tragedy in CT!

Reading some of the most outrageous comments didn't help the situation...

If it wasn't Huckleberry Mike blaming this on removing "GOD" from schools it was Bill Bennet promoting arming teachers.

Just what we need, the wild west playing out in classrooms, which by the way would only result in further carnage & trauma!

The only so-called "silver lining" I have heard so far, was President Obama last night who said; “We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change,”

Blowin' in the Wind:

By Friday afternoon I could no longer watch the Connecticut school shooting on TV. Watching the media frenzy, the pain of the grieving parents and the sadness of our President was just too much to tolerate.

America has become a violent nation. In 2012 alone there have been 7 mass shootings, killing 66 people and wounding an additional 61. Yet the far right wingers cling to their Second Amendment rights and insist on that owning an AK-47 assault rifle is for hunting.

Over the past four years hand gun sales have sky-rocketed because of the constant drum beat that Obama will take away our guns. The facts that RWNJs ignore are that President Obama has allowed guns into our National Parks and the Supreme Court has decided that it is legal to own guns. The fact is President Obama has not confiscated anyone's gun.

Gun advocates would like to see more guns in schools by arming principals and teachers. Rather than controlling the use of guns, Fox News suggests there should be a policeman in every school, yet the conservatives are not willing to pay for additional police protection.

Mike Huckabee said the Connecticut school massacre occurred because we removed God from our schools. Does this ex-preacher really believe that God wants to harm innocent children? His conservative position harkens back to medieval times when superstitious people believed that God punished people for their wrongdoings; forget about science, guns and facts.

The shooter in Connecticut was mentally ill, but the conservatives have no interest treating mental conditions. That is reflected in their budget to end Obamacare, and an unwillingness to provide parity for mental illnesses. They say the country cannot afford to pay for physical and mental illness, but I believe we cannot afford not to pay to treat serious and persistent illnesses.

I read that some children were killed with a 9 mm Glock and it is unlikely that this gun will ever be removed from gun stores. But the conversation needs to go beyond hand guns. It needs to extend to how we deal with our anger, rage, hatred and prejudices. Can we obtain the mental health services that are desperately needed? Can we disagree without becoming violent? Are we so polarized that we can never compromise to find common ground? Can we be the world's moral leader and still massacre our own children?

I'm afraid the answer to the important questions is still "blowin' in the wind".

Our children are caught in the crossfire of delusion and greed.

The semiautomatic assault weapon used against the children in Newtown was unimaginably powerful -- but the people who manufactured it ARE NOT.

We have reached gun saturation point in the United States.

Our tolerance for the Gun Death Profiteers has run out.

I still wonder how Congress will react...after all, any bill should pass Congress. The GOP-controlled House is especially worrisome. Imagine all 435 seats are up for re-election. The NRA will scare enough of these House members to back away from any new common-sense gun control measures. We already know that politicians often put their selfish interests before the public good of the country. It doesn't help -considering that Boehner has not exercised proper leadership.

A Progressive Situation; Violent Guns

Increasingly violent outbreaks of gun violence is progressing in America.
Mother was only a Nurse Aide; yet she she could afford guns. Could she had afforded medical treatment for her son?

A gun is designed to kill. The focus on mental health is just a part of the problem. Gun control is another part of the equation. There are states now trying to repeal carrying a concealed weapon. The gun violence in inner cities is a problem that needs to be addressed. Remember when guns come in these cities (the NRA allows straw men to access our youth through internet sales and gun shows) murder and mayhem occur instead of education and economic opportunities.

This GOP?/ Tea Party see this government as way to enhance the profits of the 2% under the auspices of ALEC, the NRA, and the likes of the Koch bros rather than the real job creators; their employee.

How the Right Has Twisted the 2nd Amendment

But does anyone really believe that Madison and like-minded Framers would have stood by and let deranged killers mow down civilians, including children, by using guns vastly more lethal than any that existed in the Revolutionary era? If someone had wielded a single-shot musket or pistol in 1791, the person might get off one volley but would then have to reload. No one had repeat-firing revolvers, let alone assault rifles with large magazines of bullets.

http://www.alternet.org/how-right-has-twisted-2nd-amendment?page=0%2C1

Again my condolences go to the families of this tragedy.

The NRA is holding us hostage. Worse, we’re allowing them to do it. Even worse, the McConnell’s of the Senate and House will do everything in their power to protect them. Doesn’t matter if it’s good for the country or not. That’s just the way it is. In their minds, it’s simply a matter of “this too shall pass”. And that may be the worst thing of all: they may be right.

For a lot of people these tragedies aren’t real unless it happens to them. James Brady and his family probably didn’t give two hoots about gun control until he wound up in a wheelchair. Now, it’s a different matter altogether. And although he was a distinguished gentleman in the GOP at the time, today his party won’t acknowledge him. Sort of like what happened to Bob Dole last week. The tragedy is, the Republican Party just doesn’t give a s**t about you and me. When we say “the people”, they hear “personhood” all right, but to them it means a corporation.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) will announce her pick to fill Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R) Senate seat at noon ET today

I hope the new senator from SC is not as 'deMinted' and 'tea-poisoned'. But Tim Scott? Please! He is worse.

Faces from this weekend:

Chris Jansing, MSNBC for her moving reporting all weekend long.

Howard Wolfson, Deputy Mayor of NY

Names I can't remember but I will never forgot- those who came on television from the Brady Center who have spent their lives striving for safer gun measures. The man who began a website We'rebetterthanthis.

Those who were injured in prior mass shootings who went to Connecticut to offer their support in any way they can.

To all those who signed the petition for President Obama and Congress to address gun control immediately.

______________

President Obama last night:

Can we truly say, as a nation, that we are meeting our obligations? Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children – all of them – safe from harm? Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know that they are loved, and teaching them to love in return? Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve
to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?

I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is no. We’re
not doing enough. And we will have to change.

…. We can’t tolerate this anymore ….. Surely, we can do better than this. If there is even one step we
can take to save another child, or another parent, or another town, from the grief that has visited Tucson, and Aurora, and Oak Creek, and Newtown, and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that – then surely we have an obligation to try.

….. We can’t accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

"We ask why there is violence in our schools, but we have systematically removed God from our schools," Huckabee said on Fox News. "Should we be so surprised that schools would become a place of carnage?"

What kind of a "GOD" would allow this despicable act of violence to happen in the first place, Mikey?

Should Mike Huckabee run for anything (other than a bathroom), I hope there's video of what he said Friday. Of course, showing the video of this braying jackass in full buffoonery will be called "media bias".

Ron, you weren't the only one who was haunted by "Blowin' In The Wind" this weekend.

"How many times must a man look up before he can see the sky?

Yes, 'n' how many ears must one man have before he can hear people cry?

Yes, 'n' how many deaths will it take till he knows hat too many people have died?

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind.....The answer is blowin' in the wind."

Correction:

CT school shooting updates: 20 children gunned down by son of teacher's aide

http://www.examiner.com/article/photos-ct-school-shooting-leaves-18-children-dead-27-total-fatalities

If you scroll down on the below website, there were two photos released which was taken last night in Connecticut with President Obama.

No words can describe how he managed to put smiles on these little faces. But he did.

http://theobamadiary.com/

Ron, so beautifully written. And obviously written with deep pain and sorrow.

Take heart my friend. We are all in this together now.

Hi Ron,

Very well written. Also, Huckabee is one nut job that can never hold public office again.

Pat -

The photo of the little ones with President Obama, is an amazing moment in the middle of such terrible grief. Btw, i found this little quote:

"To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,

Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them:"

(Shakespeare"s Hamlet, 1623)

Good Morning Pat:

We all feel the grief of the shooting.

Take care my friend.

Parenting...is critical... how can we improve parenting...so as to produce better kids and better citizens!!!!

.

It all starts at home, the moment a little angel is born...parents should take greater care and raise a child in the right manner...so that that little angel won't turn out to be a monster...hurting society as Adam Landa did.

These Tragedies Must End

From the article above:

“We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change,” Obama said. “We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law -- no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society.”

He added, “But that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this. If there is even one step we can take to save another child, or another parent, or another town, from the grief that has visited Tucson, and Aurora, and Oak Creek, and Newtown, and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that -- then surely we have an obligation to try.”

Much like George W. Bush’s remarks following 9/11, Obama’s speech attempted to both mourn and galvanize.

We have reached the breaking point.

I believe President Obama so eloquently said last night that the discussion starts now. No more putting off the topic for another day.

The U.S. Constitution was written for all of its citizens, and we must work together to end this needless violence.

Whether it’s more security, better mental health care, or banning weapons, I believe all subjects are on the table from this point forward.

There can be no more children dying, and no more anguished mothers and fathers.

Salud

Arming teachers is about the most stupid idea the GNOP has ever come up with. Just take a second and reflect on your own teachers. The gun would be locked in a safe, unloaded, the gunman bursts in, Sister Rose is not capable of killing. The gun was useless. If a teacher did go for the gun he would be dead.

I thank the Lord that Obama has the courage to stand up to the right wing.

Pat, I find Obama to not only be presidential, but awe inspiring in this. His speech reached out to everyone except the worst gun nuts. For them he offers change and change we will.

Blowing in the wind, written by Bob Dylan, and performed best by Peter, Paul and Mary. It brings back memories of war protest, and rock concerts. What a time. Good times. Not these times when republicans have become extremest in the shadow of fascism and the religious fanatics such as the Taliban. America rejected soundly these fanatics and will reject the gun culture.

I gained a lot of respect for Mayor Bloomberg on MTP this weekend. His view of assault weapons and the NRA are close to mine.

Why wouldn't any of these cowards come out of hiding to defend themselves?

'Meet The Press' host David Gregory said that no pro-gun rights senators would agree to go on the show on Sunday.

"We reached out to all 31 pro-gun rights senators in the new Congress to invite them on the program to share their views on the subject this morning," he said. "We had no takers."

Exito, thank you.

Have a relative who went to a school where the Vice-Principal used his shot-gun - to fatally shoot the Principal.

That one example should put any idea of guns in school to REST.

I am a part time Supervisor for our local Elementary School. I only spend an hour or so with them each day, but I can assure you it's the high light of my day. My kids are from Kindergarten through 5th grade, I've watched them grow up from K-1 true 5th Grade. They're like my own kids. Love them all. Raised 5 kids ( sons and daughters ) of my own, so you know I must love ALL kids in school. My heart bleeds for those killed and terrified by the slaughter of all those kids last Friday. They could have been MY kids.

God please help heal the Parents of the slain children and hold those close to your heart. Help all the other children, their Parents, the Community and our Nation heal from this tragedy.

And please President Obama and our Congress, PLEASE PLEASE do what you know must be done with the GUN LAWS of our Country. Fix them. No more tradedies, please.

Huckabee is right. When we took god out of movie theatres , post offices, and work places across the country, that's when the crazy gunners went nuts.

Now, let me offer some other brilliant gems for you people who don't understand the rewarding and heart-warming relationship you could be having with a gun. You probably haven't heard these brilliant points before.

• Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
• Oh yeah, well people with cars kill more people than guns.
• Gun owners prevent 3,194,219 crimes each day, but the lamestream media don't report it.
• If you ban guns, bad people will simply switch to butter knives for their massacres.
• You always have to be ready to go to war with your own government.
• The Constitution guarantees my right to own a gun, NOT YOUR right to safety.

There it is! We have the brilliant arguments. You got nuthin' but dead bodies scattered everywhere.

Cali Tom,

This must have hit you very hard. You have written a wonderful tribute to "your kids" and children everywhere.

I too, am besotted by little ones. And the love, joy & wonder they bring to us all.

I am beyond sad. I spent a lot of time with my kids this weekend. I held them tighter than ever...and every night after they went to bed I broke down a little bit because I had held in my emotion all day. They understand what happened on Friday. And they are very sad about it too.

I just looked at my kids all weekend and could not imagine the grief felt by those parents. The anguish and guilt that the parents of children who survived must feel. The horrifying images that will be forever etched in the minds of first responders and surviving children. The sadness felt by those who knew the adults who sacrificed their lives to protect the children at the school. And the horrible sense of guilt and loss the shooter's family must feel. I watched my youngest son's football game and the faces of his teammates after the game. Just the happy go lucky innocence of a child having fun. And there are way too many children in one town in Connecticut who will never have that.

This discussion will inevitably turn political. And I really don't care if people agree or disagree with me...but here are my thoughts: There are 3 issues that need to be discussed (not just the one that will dominate the headlines). 1. Mental Health 2. School Safety 3. Gun Control. We as a nation need to figure out what drives someone to do something like this. That's why I think mental health treatment and recognition is vital. If someone is warped enough to want to kill family and loads of children, they will likely be able to find the means to do so. Doesn't mean we can't make it harder, but more on that in a second. School safety needs to be reviewed and discussed. How can we make schools safer and prevent things like this. This school had a security system in place...but it was no match for the gunman's arsenal. Arming teachers and principals? Personally, I think teachers should only need to worry about teaching. What about an armed security guard / police officer at all schools? I don't know...it's a possibility and I think preferable to arming teachers and principals. However, there is obviously a cost associated with this and we aren't exactly awash in money right now as a country. However, the safety of our children should certainly receive a higher priority than a lot of other things that currently receive funding. As for guns...I don't own any...but I support people's second amendment right to own them. That being said there is no freaking way someone needs a 30 round clip and an assault rifle unless they are on a battlefield, military training exercises, or law enforcement. Something needs to be done about them. I don't know the right answer...but the discussion needs to take place.

I just sent a donation to the Sandy Hook School Support Fund (being run by the United Way of Western Connecticut). I would encourage everyone to do the same if they can.

I want to leave with something positive. It seems that lately, the only times we see athletes in the news are for DWI arrests, domestic violence, or some other arrest report. But there are good ones out there. And after reading this article, I'm realizing that Victor Cruz of the NY Giants is one of those good ones.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/sunday-tribute-victor-cruz-remain-connected-sandy-hook-230417557--nfl.html

Take care everyone.

Backhouse, your quote brought tears to my eyes.

Wonderful posts and comments Backhouse, Feisty, Ron, Beverly, Jack, Pigotry, Pat, John, David, Calif Tom, Tomas, Grimey......

I caught Lester Holt, NBC, trying to report the latest at that particular moment while conducting an interview--that many of those killed were between the ages 5 and 10; Holt was so distraught, he could not speak. I watched President Obama'saddress Friday, unable to keep his composure, struggling to speak the words without breaking down, wiping tears--"our hearts are broken, today". I felt the same, I struggled to grasp the horror; alternated between overwhelming sadness and outrage as each bit of breaking news became more unfathomable.

John, President Obama's words last night were stunning in its message.

Simply stunning.

We watch these tragedies on tv. The president has to go to them and show comfort and leadership. Every single time these things happen.

His kindness and warmth and anger I hope spreads to all as we figure out how to never let this happen again.

These children may believe in Santa Claus, but above all else, they entrust us with their lives and futures. We need to live up to that responsibility.

Why is the US so much more violent than Europe?

While there may or may not be a link between kids who watch violent TV shows or movies or play violent video games, it still can’t explain why these events happen so much more often in the US than the rest of the world. If I was to go to the local movie theater, I would see pretty much the same list of films here in France that US viewers will have available. Same goes for TV shows and the same applies to video games.

So let the right wing political class talk about violence in games and TV, but that does little to address the real problem. America has a sick illness when it comes to guns and there’s no way around that truth. Instead of worrying about dividing America on social issues that aren’t really issues, the conservative right ought to be a lot more concerned about the excessive violence on the streets, rather than violence on TV. American TVs and video games may be violent, but it pales in comparison to the real world gun violence every day, across the country.

http://americablog.com/2012/12/why-is-the-us-more-violent-than-other-countries-who-see-same-movies-and-video-games.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Americablog+%28AMERICAblog+News%29

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see the dissimilarities between other countries and the US daily. I'm sure many, many others do too. I hope the right and the NRA don't stymy Senator Diane Fienstien's legislation.

Pigotry wrote:

"I still wonder how Congress will react..."

That's a very good question, Pigotry. But to the shame of the American people I think the answer to your question is already clear, just looking at the way congress has functioned -- or rather not functioned -- for the past two years. In the US Congress, the recent past is probably an accurate predictor of the near future. We voted to keep most of these rascals in office!

Legislation to regulate firearms in some manner will not be permitted to be brought to the floor for a vote in the US House. And legislation will be proposed in the Senate but will not reach the necessary 60 vote cloture required to bring it to a vote; blocked like every other proposed piece of legislation.

I'm afraid this issue is only going to be addressed in the state legislative assemblies, encouraged by the outrage of the people of the several states where these most recent tragedies have occurred. I have already written to the President of the Senate in my state of Oregon

Folks, I have to tell you, there is a whole sub-culture out there the mainstream media has largely ignored, of fearful, paranoid survivialists who spin dark fantasies of needing to prepare for the collapse of the economy. And by prepare, I don't mean having a cupboard of canned goods, I mean stocking GUNS. These folks, and by all accounts the shooter's mother, are convinced they may have to defend themselves against their own government. They terrify each other with thoughts of the collapse to come. I know folks who have bug-out plans, as they call them, including hidden stashes of goods in the woods. One could consider it a harmless waste of money, except their fears have a habit of snowballing - and the result is what happened in Connecticutt, where a mentally ill boy got his hands on his paranoid's mother's weaponry.

Frank."Grimey"

Thank you for your thoughtful post.

If we all start the discussion from the viewpoint of a parent, grandparent, etc, solutions will be found.

If we start the discussion from the political chasm of extremism , nothing will be done.

Ron my dear friend,

Thank you for the fabulous post, and reminding us how our people are our most precious resource.

(Clearly, America's most dangerous product is GUNS, not people.)

"How often must we note that no other developed country has such massacres on a regular basis because no other comparable nation allows such easy access to guns?" (E.J. Dionne)

Huckabee is a fool!.....

There is no God that would have prevented this carnage or any of the many others.

Man is the apex animal.....not killing simply for food or survival, but for sport, revenge.....supposedly with a brain and the ability to reason and decide........

There is no God in mass murder........

The gun issue will never go away. People if we keep killing other people in mass for no reason guns will be history for everyday people. lets have a conversation without any bull$hit in it. The first question is finding common ground between gun owners like myself and non gun owners. This is coming from a "lefty liberal" who doesn't want to see the price that would be paid on both sides. That price would be more division this country doesn't need that. Both sides need to come up with ideas that will stop this type of action. Both sides can't be arguing with each other and calling each other names. Its at times like this Americans need to come together. Please lets get serious before this issue gets any worse.

If it’s a LARGER policy discussion, it’s much harder for the most ardent NRA-supporting lawmaker to walk away.

=======================

Personally, I thought this was the most telling statement of the article. At face value, I find it tragic that the sheer number of, age of and manner of death these individuals suffered would have made it much harder for the most ardent NRA-supporting lawmakers to ways away.

If that doesn't frame the power of special interest and money, I don't know what will.

Feisty .....I haven't go the whole "cut and paste" thing down, so I will quote your question...............

"What kind of a "God" would allow this despicable act of violence to happen in the first place, Mikey"?

To answer your question I will quote a T-shirt I saw the other day, that read;

Confused human to God: Why would you allow so many school children to be killed?

God to confused human: Because of liberals, I am not allowed in schools.

Sadly as I read most of the comments here, you liberals "fawn" over Obama's comments over this tragic event,

as though you all look to "him" to validate your feelings about this tragedy........not "Him".

And there is a simple reason WHY...........this "progressive" break down of society, is a direct cause of society "progressing" AWAY from conservative values.....and become more liberal.

There is no sense of "personal responsibility" anymore......we all now look to Government to "guide us" and "take care" of our needs..........who needs FAMILY STRUCTURE?

And your RALLYING CRY in this last election? You "progressives" will NEVER stop killing children through ABORTION.............and you want it provided for free(taxpayer funded).......and ON DEMAND.

So your "progressive message is.........NO personal responsibility: entitlements and "the rich" will pay your way.

And there really is NO VALUE to human life.........it is seen as..... "inconvenient" and as such....should be LEGAL to end it.......ON DEMAND.

AFTER ALL WERE ENTITLED..........right?

I'm seriously wondering why some people can't see the amount of evil that has entered the public square since secularists have decided that religion, or the mention of God has to be completely removed. I don't recall any school shootings prior to 1962 when it was deemed OK for schools to allow prayer, or discussions of a spiritual nature.

It appears as though today's secularists have completely rejected the history we are living through. How many events will it take before it dawns on these people, when you force out the good in life, evil will replace it. For the past 50 years, schools have been forbidden to allow any sort of mention of God and we are seeing the resultant evil that has been flowing into the school arena. You have to admit what happened on Friday is extreme evil.

Even if you don't believe in God, most people do believe in good and evil. When good is removed, evil will take it's place.

When I lived in San Diego, my employer prior to my employment had security guards with guns....until one of the guards killed his wife, came to work and committed suicide with the gun the employer had provided. The result was common sense prevailed: no more armed security guards.

The cockroach leadership of the NRA has hidden from the light of day that exposes them for the thugs that they are. Wayne LaPierre, YOU are the one that ought to be made to face the mothers of the babies that died. YOU! Will that happen? No. LaPierre, with his obsession about guns is a coward supreme. Bullies only bully in large groups and that is what the NRA is. Each of you that has a membership in that organization should do the rational thing and resign, because the only thing that bunch understands is money and greed. And if you don't, you should have to face those bereft mothers too.

The same group of cockroaches, the Republican Governors are engaged in a battle to victimize public employees and have them seen as on the dole.

They should have to face the mothers who lost THEIR adult children. Those teachers, that Principal, the School Psychologist who stood in the face of NRA evil and protected those children at the cost of their lives.

God help us all if we don't get off this crazy course we are on.

Pat, your posts are treasures.

Learned today that the President solo-authored the speech. He said we're not doing enough to keep our children safe, and that we'll have to change "regardless of the politics".

We have suffered this agony too many times to look the other way NOW.

Mruseurhead:

You must be from the Westboro Baptist Church.

Frank Grimes: There are many heart felt, caring and well thought out post this morning, no one will top yours.

edgarw,

Your logic goes like this:

a. There was a time when prayer had a place in school and there was no violence.

b. Now there is no prayer in school and there is violence.

c. Therefore, violence is caused by the lack of prayer in school.

Sorry, that's a false argument. Go back to college and take Logic 101.

David Walker wrote:

" .... Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Oh yeah, well people with cars kill more people than guns."

Yes, David. I keep reading similar arguments by people writing sarcastic observations such as "Automobiles kill people too, so why not ban automobiles?" That's getting a bit thin ...

Well, let's examine that. Let's turn that question around and say "Ok, yes, automobiles and guns can both kill. But rather than ban either, let's just treat them equally?"Well why not?

And here's a sample of what that would look like in my own State of Oregon. Here are the Oregon requirements for licenses, and registration and insurance to own and operate an automobile in Oregon (with the "automobile" and "motor vehicle" references changed to read "FIREARM") :

*****************

MINIMUM FIREARM INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Oregon's mandatory insurance law requires every FIREARM owner to insure their FIREARM(S). The minimum liability insurance a FIREARM owner must have is:

Bodily Injury and property damage liability:
* $25.000.00 Per person; and
* $50,000.00 per incident for bodily injury to others; and
* $20,000.00 per incident for damage to other's property

Personal Injury Protection (for reasonable and necessary medical, dental and other expenses incurred up to 1-year after the incident):
* $15,000.00 per person

Uninsured FIREARM owner:
* $25,000.00 per person; and
* $50,000.00 per incident for bodily injury

Note: You must certify that you have this insurance each time you register and/or renew registration for a FIREARM, or when you buy FIREARM permit. You must also certify that you will comply with Oregon's FIREARM insurance requirements as long as a FIREARM is registered in your name, or for the duration of the permit.

OREGON FIREARM LICENSE
While handling a FIREARM on any premises open to the public in Oregon, you must have either a valid FIREARM license or FIREARM instruction permit issued by the state in your possession. If you are over the age of 18 and need to gain FIREARM experience before getting your FIREARM license, you may obtain an instruction permit.

To Qualify / Apply You must apply in person, and you must:
* Be a resident of or domiciled in Oregon;
* Be at least 18 years of age;
* Have no suspended, canceled, revoked, or otherwise withdrawn FIREARM privileges in Oregon or any other state;
* Submit a completed FIREARM Application. If you answer “yes” to any of the medical questions on the application as outlined the state will not issue you FIREARM privileges until you have established that your condition does not affect your ability to handle a FIREARM safely.

You may be asked to provide additional medical information and/or require that you pass additional FIREARM tests;
* Present proof of your full legal name;
* Present proof of your legal presence in the U.S., identity and date of birth;
* Provide your Social Security Number on the application;
* Present proof of your residence address;
* Pass the FIREARM knowledge test;
* Make an appointment for a FIREARM test. If you have a valid FIREARM license issued by a U.S. State, you may not be required to take the FIREARM test;
* Pass the FIREARM test. If you do not have proof of insurance for the FIREARM, you will have to reschedule the FIREARM test;
* Pass a vision screening;
* Surrender any valid Oregon ID Card;
* Surrender any valid FIREARM license or permit issued by another jurisdiction (state,
territory, etc);
* Pay the applicable testing and licensing fees. You must pay test fees prior to taking any FIREARM test. Be prepared to make separate payments for your testing and licensing fees; and

* Have your photograph taken.

After you meet the requirements, you are issued an interim card to use until you receive your FIREARM license in the mail.
If you surrender a previous FIREARM license, instruction permit or Oregon ID Card, it is hole-punched and returned to you. The hole-punched card is not valid by itself, but may be used as additional proof of identity with the interim card.

FIREARM LICENSE FEES
Original fee: $60.00
Renewal fee: $40.00
Replacement fee: $26.50
Firearm License Test fee: $9.00
Reinstatement fee for a Suspension or Revocation: $75.00

FIREARM TITLE FEES
Regular Title fee: $77.00 per firearm
Replacement Title fee: $77.00 per firearm
Regular Title Transfer fee (replacement): $77.00 per firearm

FIREARM REGISTRATION FEES
Regular registration (4 years for firest registration): $172.00 per FIREARM
Renewal registration: (2 years): $86.00 per FIREARM

LICENSE PLATE FEE (the unique metal ID Plate must be mechanically attached to FIREARM)
Single plate: $12.00 per FIREARM
Plate transfer fee: $6.00 per FIREARM
Replacement plate fee at time of renewal: $5.00
Replacement plate fee between renewals: $10.00

****************************

Now before anyone comments, ... no, of course I can't assert that treating the ownership and possession of firearms at least equally to the ownership and operation of a motor vehicle would reduce the number of deaths and injuries from gun violence and accidents related to guns.

But gosh, why shouldn't we try? Don't we owe it to our children to at least try?

I think it would be difficult for the logical and rational citizen of the United States to argue why we should not. Both motor vehicles and firearms require significant care and diligence to be owned and operated responsibly, and both can kill, both can injure and both can maim when handled irresponsibly.

And why shouldn't gun ownership carry the lion's share of the real costs to our society for gun owners to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment says that fees, permits and licenses will not be mandated; and no, that is not an "infringement" of your rights. It is simple regulation.

At the very least, imposing these sort of insurance requirements, fees and licensing requirements will greatly reduce the desire by many to own numerous firearms; those wanting their own arsenals like the mother of the Connecticut shooter. The costs and effort alone will ensure that.

And we can be certain that the insurance companies and the insurance underwriters are going to take a lot closer look at an individual's medical and mental health history, prior police records and record of adult responsibility than currently occurs in a 15-minute background check, before those companies will issue the insurance coverage required for individuals to own firearms. After all, the insurance companies will be on the financial hook when something happens involving one of their insured, just as they are with motor vehicle insurance.

The fact that we haven't already taken such actions in the United States to treat firearms with sensible, responsible regulations and controls, such as we already do with motor vehicles, is nothing short of absurd.

Just my tuppence.

Ron, Indiana:

I read that some children were killed with a 9 mm Glock and it is unlikely that this gun will ever be removed from gun stores.

The latest report I heard was that all of the victims at the school were killed with the Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle. Some had been shot 10 times, and all of the carnage was perpetrated in the mere 10 minutes between the time the 911 call went out to the time the police got there.

The 2nd Amendment doesn't give anyone the right to own any kind of weapon they fancy, and there is no reason anyone should be allowed to have these assault rifles. Rightwingers don't like it when semiautomatics are called assault rifles, so how about calling them what they really are: mass murder guns.

Why wouldn't any of these cowards come out of hiding to defend themselves?

Obviously, guns were not allowed on the MTP set, and they refused come 'under fire' for their ideology without being armed with AK-47s as a 'reasonable' response. Chicken-@!$%#s - each and every one of them.

Jody, thanks for that example.

The idea of arming school officials would be laughable, if it wasn't insanely terrible.

People/officials who work in schools also have bad hair days - as per your post.

Data clearly shows that guns in homes escalate domestic violence. And all too frequently the owner's gun is turned against themselves, as in the Lanza case.

Amy, that's a great point at 1.33. My Uncle was one of those folks back in the 70s and 80s, not going full Survivalist but being a John Bircher he was certainly of the mindset that the government we all jointly form might turn on him at any time and his guns would be the last defense.

Of course that was well before the Kochs and their like spent mass amounts of money in a marketing blitz for bat-crazy ideas.

New Day your post is amusing and laughable as usual. To you "progressives" it is only YOU, that should be "represented" ..............by "all powerful" GROUPS.

And you want others to believe you can legislate, mandate, and IMPOSE laws......and that will fix the problem........cause Obama says so.

OBAMA and YOU say its illegal......so those who act illegally are going to follow your rules.

Connecticut already has LAWS in place banning "assault weapons"........worked didn't it?

As long as its advancing liberal AGENDA, such as NOW and PPH pushing their ABORTION AGENDA, thats golden.

You "progressives" reserve the RIGHT to murder millions of children......on you terms and ON DEMAND.

To an "unborn child" there really is no difference between "caustic chemicals" and "high powered vacuums", and a BULLET..............the result is the same..........a child dies.

Difference?....................................its LEGAL.

So save us from your..... holier than thou "judgements"....

And your schemes to RID us from the "evil" guns by taking them away from those who will not give up theirs.......

criminals and the criminally insane, so we can HIDE in closets.......

and PRAY the authorities will arrive in time.

edgarw

I don't recall any school shootings prior to 1962 when it was deemed OK for schools to allow prayer, or discussions of a spiritual nature.

There WERE such incidents going back before then, but few people had easy access to high-capacity semiautomatic rifles like today so the death tolls were not so horrific. Some people may see that as a more rational cause-effect relationships.

Even if you don't believe in God, most people do believe in good and evil. When good is removed, evil will take it's place.

The gunman was insane. The gun lobby and the NRA who are making money by flooding the world with weapons of mass destruction are quite sane. They and the politicians that do their bidding are the knowing enablers of the evil, and that makes them evil, too.

There it is! We have the brilliant arguments. You got nuthin' but dead bodies scattered everywhere.

@David

I believe they get their defense from the Wizard of Oz. After all, houses and water don't kill people, Dorothy's kill people.

Here we go, bleeding heart p*ssy libs crying about guns. Hey, I think Obama set this up. He wants control of the country and brought to a 1917 USSR level, remember FORWARD. Hey good luck removing guns though LOL. Hey why not figure out what caused the problem instead of blaming an object that can't hurt anyone without an insane person controllling it. Morons

The 2nd Amendment doesn't give anyone the right to own any kind of weapon they fancy, and there is no reason anyone should be allowed to have these assault rifles

on the contrary, it explicitly says the right to bear arms. that would include AR's. you have the right not to own one. Like i said good luck trying to ban guns HOUSTON. Now watch the gun sales sky rocket. HAHAHA. in fact im going to invest in a couple of Assault Rifles myself

Now watch all the libs hair explode in violent anger LOL. all too easy

Mruseurhead

To an "unborn child" there really is no difference between "caustic chemicals" and "high powered vacuums", and a BULLET..............the result is the same..........a child dies.

A fertilized egg is not a child.

Confused human to God: Why would you allow so many school children to be killed?

God to confused human: Because of liberals, I am not allowed in schools

That's your opinion, not that of this Christian. As opposed to your flip assumption that God hates Liberals it puts me in mind of a different quote, this one actually from the Bible;

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

http://bible.cc/matthew/7-15.htm

Maybe they will start 'packing heat' in the halls of Congress!.....Their amendment rights and all that!

Uh, Caesar, please tell me you actually don't find this funny...please?

Here we go, bleeding heart p*ssy libs crying about guns. Hey, I think Obama set this up. He wants control of the country and brought to a 1917 USSR level, remember FORWARD.

And the insanity continues. Behold the brilliance of the Conservative mind.

Caesar Augustus-

HAHAHA. in fact im going to invest in a couple of Assault Rifles myself

You sound too unstable to pass a background check, but I suppose you can always go to a gun show and pick up the weapon of your choice.

Let's look at "arms" – specifically, guns – as they existed at the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment in 1791:

Guns in 1791 WOULD ...

* be made by a gunsmith.

* have rudimentary rifling.

* be single-shot weapons.

* would take 30-seconds to 1-minute to reload.

* be loaded through the muzzle.

* fire by means of a flintlock.

Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT ...

* have interchangeable parts. (Popularized in 1798)

* be revolvers. (Invented in 1835)

* be breach-loaded. (Popularized in 1810)

* use smokeless powder. (Invented in 1885)

* use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets. (Invented in 1842)

* load bullets from a clip. (Invented in 1890)

Courts can't wish away the Second Amendment, but they can construe it in a manner that works in today's society (and is consistent with the Second Amendment's original intent).

Credit: repost from Columbia Law School American Constitution Society

Let's break down your interpretation Jack in Portsmouth:

edgarw,

Your logic goes like this: The trouble is, you are identifying this with logic. This isn't the equivalency of a mathematics problem.

a. There was a time when prayer had a place in school and there was no violence. I didn't say that. I said the occurance of school shootings was practically non-existent.

b. Now there is no prayer in school and there is violence. Again I will correct you. I said that for 50 years of growing evil, we are seeing the resultant evidence of it.

c. Therefore, violence is caused by the lack of prayer in school. Your conclusion is wrong. If you break it down, people are asking why God didn't step in and stop this... First He couldn't... He has been forced out by secularists. God is a gentleman first. He will not go where He is not wanted.

Sorry, that's a false argument. Go back to college and take Logic 101. I realize this is an insult. Maybe if you were to actually read what what was said, you wouldn't be so bold as to try to express it in logical terms. Your sense of logic serves no purpose other than to show your innate ability to boast on the elementary nature of your response.

I want all of you to read the post at 1.52 and understand the depth of the insanity we face. These "people" again, cockroaches cannot talk about gun control, so they must needs project to other topics and attack those who want to begin to solve the problem.

Mental midgets all.

There are restrictions on abortion, and the cockroaches in the Republican Party are now engaged in humiliating women in need in any way possible, including state rape with trans vaginal ultrasound.

So let's have the same laws for the gun addicts. You want a gun? You will need an internal exam, man or woman to get one. You will need to wait. You will need to look at photos of the murdered innocents in Sandy Hook, study them and be able to recite chapter and verse what those innocents looked like, slaughtered by greed and craziness.

You will need to pay a high tax to purchase a gun or ammunition, and that money will go to fund mental health treatment, including group homes, therapeutic foster care and Psychiatry. And then you will need to go for an evaluation yourself by a mental health professional YEARLY, including testing instruments to find out what makes you tick.

Need I go on?

edgarw:

Did his mother take him to church? Did he participate in Sunday school? Why is it the responsibility of the school to give your kids a religious education? Which religion? Any religion as long as it's Christianity?

Your insinuation that evil abhors a vacuum of good is absurd. There is good that exists outside of religion - you do not have a monopoly. Your comments, and those of Mruserurhead, show your inability to tackle tough problems head-on. You simply shrug your shoulders, sigh, and say - "Sh!t happens. Oh well. I can't figure out a solution so that means God must have intended for this to happen as punishment." Religion causes a dumbing down of us all because it allows us to defer responsibility to a higher power that must have a reason for letting something like that happen, and it absolves us from any responsibility for finding a way to stop the madness. You might as well be saying that we are too stupid to solve this problem so we can expect more of the same until we have sacrificed enough souls to quench His thirst for blood.

Robert in Oregon: I was a member of the Oregon House of Representatives for five terms in the 1980's. One of the most disheartening events during my tenure came as a result of a bill sponsored by every level of law enforcement in the state - State Police, County Sheriffs, local Chiefs of Police. The bill would prohibit the sale or possession of armor piercing ammunition. These rounds are useless for hunting or target shooting, but will penetrate body armor easily.

The NRA vehemently opposed the bill on the premise that it was an attempt by liberals to restrict ammunition today, and ban guns tomorrow.

The bill died in committee.

Backhouse - Unfortunately there was a Republican from East Texas who did appear with Chris Wallace on Fox of all places. Louie Gohmert, and he advocated that the teachers and administrators should have been armed. This is not an unexpected response from the right.

All I can say about his response is unbelievable. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/12/16/louie_gohmert_lawmaker_calls_for_more_guns_after_school_shooting.html

Obama did not even mention gun control in his address to the nation on Friday, or last night. You assume too much.

Something does have to happen here, folks. Whatever it takes so innocent little 6 year old kids are never slaughtered again. I can't think of a good argument against that.

"Courts can't wish away the Second Amendment, but they can construe it in a manner that works in today's society..."

No. They can read it in English.

First of all let me qualify this by stating that I am a gun owner. I bought a small concealable pistol in March and got my CCW too. This was more in response to what I saw as deteriorating social conditions in Michigan/USA than anything else. I guess I have to surrender my "Liberal" card now.

I never carry the weapon. Many people of the hard-core right wing stripe delude themselves into thinking a pistol will make them safer if they carry it EVERY DAY, even in the shower. I once carried it while campaigning for Proposal 2 when canvassing in a Republican neighborhood, or to counter any potentially hostile dog that might be around. You do not need to carry a gun around with you every waking moment. If you live in a place that is THAT dangerous (Mogadishu, Tel-Aviv, Beirut) then maybe you should seriously consider putting the money toward moving expenses as opposed to handgun purchase.

All that having been said I think the problem laid bare by Columbine and this shooting have more to do with safely, sensibly securing the weapons in question.

I selected a firearm that has multiple, overlapping, redundant safeties so that it is impossible to use that gun in an unauthorized fashion: It has a key to shut off the trigger mechanism, I hide that key out of reach so deep in the dark, spider-webby hole in my basement that no one could find it. If they get past that, the gun has a magazine safety that will not permit you to fire the gun without the magazine in it. I keep that magazine tightly concealed in a separate place upstairs. The gun itself is locked in a wall safe that I have lag bolted into a concrete wall. No way to penetrate it without a sledge hammer. The gun is double-action, has a veeerrrrry looooooong trigger pull and features an indicator that pops up red when a round is chambered. The gun also has a manual safety.

And if all that were not enough I still have one fail-safe safety measure whose effectiveness overrides all of the others: I have no bullets for it in the house. If I want to shoot I buy bullets at the range, and spend ALL OF THEM putting holes in paper. Then I go home.

My gun is secured like Fort Knox, and I refuse to compromise on any of these measures. My son is too precious.

How or why that woman allowed her mentally-ill son access to high-power firearms is beyond me. It represents the most colossal lapse of sanguine judgement.

If you are a gun owner, PLEASE SECURE YOUR WEAPONS SAFELY,....INTELLIGENTLY. No potential burglar out there presents the danger to your family that your gun does.

Lock them up, and never stop being safe with them.

A common sense solution, that is stricter gun control, won't go anywhere in this country because there are too many cowards that blindly cling to their guns in this country. Yes, these people are cowards.

Newday,

Hear, hear.

Mental midgets all.

That certainly applies to edgarw, who is so wrapped up in his own little mythic worldview that he is unable to discern the absurdity of his argument. Rather, he says--proudly, in fact--that his argument doesn't have to be logical. And there we have it. The reason we don't have sensible gun laws in this country.

Huston.................your "progressive definition of human life is part of the problem. I am glad for you that you can find solace in the taking of human life by your "progressive bastardization of the term "fetus" .

In reality HUSTON fetus is simply a description of a cycle of development of an unborn child........not LESS THAN.

Yes. Paranoid cowards who should NEVER be allowed near guns.

Absolutely, Jack. What on earth is the problem with these people?

DNFTT

edgarw wrote:

He has been forced out by secularists. God is a gentleman first. He will not go where He is not wanted.

Me:

Explain Sodom and Gomorrah.

Houston made this comment> The gunman was insane. The gun lobby and the NRA who are making money by flooding the world with weapons of mass destruction are quite sane. They and the politicians that do their bidding are the knowing enablers of the evil, and that makes them evil, too.

Come on now Houston... there are many forms of evil that are flooding the market with their wares on an unsuspecting populace. If you don't think single shooter video games have an effect on young teens and how they view life in general, I'd have to say you are naive.

I will agree that there is no need for assault type weapons to be in the hands of people. These weapons have but one purpose and it ain't huntin. Where I draw the line on gun control is handguns and shotguns. Both have a purpose. My guns are used for protection. I keep them stored close to the bed and can obtain them in a matter of seconds. That's where they stay unless I bring them to the range to practice.

I would not object to the removal of assault weapons.... but that will never happen. Not because of politicians or NRA lobbiests... It's because those who own them will not give them up... They will hide them and make sure nobody finds them. No amount of laws on the books will ever stop the guns... Just take a look at all the laws in Chicago... and the amount of gun deaths that occur there everyday.

Robert in Oregon: You want a comment; RIGHT ON. There is on one in our government that would dare to go that far. It just makes to much sense.

Noid Im not laughing at the tragedy of what happened. God no since i have children that age but im not surprised that a sitting president and the lot of you decry making this political as you make it political. hypocrites you all. Again you might want to evaluate what caused this man to do what he did, not what he used.

Houston I have no problems passing background checks. You may think im unstable but coming from a limp wristed libtard that is a compliment. P.S. I own many guns legally. That is what separates the good from the bad. Like I said Houston, good luck changing the second amendment. Da Comrade!

blearyeyed asked > Explain Sodom and Gomorrah.

Before I do that... do you know the biblical account of Sodom and Gomorrah? If you do, why would I need to explain it? It's pretty self explanatory. It sort of speaks of God's wrath... against sin.

I am 59 years old, and I have "been around the block" ( as well as most of the world ). And since becoming an adult I have experienced real fear and insecurity only once in my life .... in the home of a friend who was suffering deep depression, and struggling with grief from the loss of a personal relationship as well as the loss of his job.

And why did I experience fear and insecurity that night? Because he owned numerous guns, and they were in his home ... as was I. :-(

Robert, OR, interesting posts; thanks for sharing the laws in OR which are logical and reasonable.

NDD, taxing guns and ammunition, then using the tax revenues to fund mental health makes a lot of sense.

edgarw, there is nothing to prevent any child or adult from praying in school or in any public place; all they need do is say those prayers to themselves. People pray silently all the time. Your logic is twisted. We live in a country with multiple religions, which God should be allowed in public places? We live in a country where Jewish people do not celebrate Christmas because they do not believe Jesus was the son of God so they do not pray in his name. We live in a country where the Constitution established the freedom of and freedom from religion; our Constitution established a secular public placing religion where it belonged in the private. Religion or the lack of religion in schools and public places has absolutely nothing to do with increased violence. A crazed individual killed his mother, took her guns and slaughtered 26 more. Clearly, you are religious; the Bible speaks of the devil and evil always at odds against God and good.

I am disgusted by the comments from the gun advocates that the answer is to arm teachers. fFirstly, how dare they decide for teachers a required "skill" for them? These people actually believe they get to choose for teachers that they must carry guns? And how did the theory of packing more fire power help the shooters mother? Their simplistic argument didn't work out too well for Nancy, did it? This also conveniently sets aside the fact that teachers come from all walks of life. Some are pacifists, some have religious beliefs, some are physically incapable of handling a firearm effectively - yet these gun advocates believe that everyone is like them and should be on their side in the argument. I sincerely hope the nation stands up to these bullies that wrap themselves in the flag and the constitution every time this happens, as if they are the only patriots in the country. Patriotism comes in many forms, one being wanting the lives of our children made safer.
Gun control cannot happen too soon. I suggest metal tags on every gun registered, a ban on assault weapons, and no gun ownership permitted in households with individuals being treated for any sort of mental condition. We keep closer control on drivers, automobiles, and pet dogs, for heavens sake!

GOP-i-sex-tinct, You contridict yourself in saying you should "intelligently" secure your weapons, then describe a Rube Goldberg method of keeping it so that no one (including yourself) would be able to get to it if needed. If you are that afraid that you might harm someone, you really need to get rid of the weapon and seek professional help. Also, a CCW is meant to protect you in UNANTICPATED circumstances. If people KNEW exactly when and where they needed to carry protection, it would be much easier to avoid. And, if you haven't figured it out yet (because the media conveniently ignores it), all recent mass murderers have been LIBERALS.

That's right, lets keep blaming the tools and not the people.... Those of you that are anti-weapons do not understand one bit what your pushing for. It does not make any one person safer then they are now. It does not protect anybody or prevent weapons getting into the hands of the ill willed. It only means the criminals and law enforcement will have weapons. Thusly taking the arms away from good law abiding citizen all across this nation that use it for recreational and to survive. Despite what you think over 70% of the USA is still wild and dangerous. I have bears, wolves, fishercats and what some game cams caught recently in the area, mountain lions. I go running every morning, and need self protection should any undesirable situation arises. And also in the case of the AR movement we now see, GFY. There is nothing wrong with an AR. The arguments are always made to rid them because of their ease of use and quick loading. That is another retarding argument. There are tons of speed loaders out there for revolvers and other rifles. What about repeater rifles? They are lever action and carry a decent load.

Only stupid people truly believe that removing weapons from the masses is the cure.

well there we go. Robert in Oregon only experienced real fear and insecurity once in his life ergo weapons should be banned. im glad that you, the sole human out of 7 billion people, believe that your experience is the definition of reality.

Only stupid people truly believe that removing weapons from the masses is the cure.

welcome to FR. they dont care what the cause of this tragedy is, they have an agenda (it's not political remember).

To answer this comment Blearyeyed> Did his mother take him to church? Did he participate in Sunday school? Why is it the responsibility of the school to give your kids a religious education? Which religion? Any religion as long as it's Christianity?

It appears you are taking a strong stance against exactly what my meaning is. Nobody is suggesting that schools take up the mantle of providing a spiritual environment for children. What the problem is, goes directly against the Constitution. I realize that there are laws on the books that seem to supersede what is written but the Constitution does say that the Government shall not inhibit the free exercise of religion... and here we go... secularists have taken it out of schools. Seems to me there's a huge conflict with our basic rights. The erosion of our rights are happening right in front of us, and yet those who support it, don't see it.

There are a lot of people in this country that do believe in God. They have children. Why are their children denied their freedom of choice because some don't believe in God? Who made them rulers?

Look at OBAMA try to milk this.... what a 2 faced turd...

He stays he is all about peace and is fake crying about the loss of life of the kids... yet he is bombing families over in the middle east with drones and doesnt care 1 bit about them....

IF YOU TAKE AWAY OUR 2nd AMMENDMENT WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DEFEND OUTSELVES AGAINST A HORRIBLE GOVERNMENT...

WAKE UP PEOPLE!

To those of you making this a political issue - shame on you. This was a senseless tragedy committed by a sick and disturbed individual who no doubt had serious mental issues. Whether violent video games/movies/television played a role is a valid question. Whether he had a disorder (as reported) that could have been treated (or perhaps he should have been institutionalized). Whether an armed security guard posted at the school have prevented the tragedy. Did his mother have the guns secured? These are all questions that should be pondered. Pointing fingers at democrats, republicans, etc. should NOT be the issue. Pointing to God should NOT be the issue. Though I hope those that pray find comfort and healing in their relationship with God.

This discussion should focus SOLELY on remembering those that were victims. Embracing the families and friends of the victims. Hold your own children a little tighter and a little longer each day. Life is precious and we never know when tragedy could strike. Focus on making sure your loved ones know they are loved. Slow down - appreciate the beauty in life. Stop pickering and politicizing every little thing on an internet discussion board.

No family should ever have to bury their children, especially during the Christmas season. God bless and comfort all that have felt the horrible impact of this tragedy.

OUwhine wrote:

"Backhouse - Unfortunately there was a Republican from East Texas who did appear with Chris Wallace on Fox of all places. Louie Gohmert, and he advocated that the teachers and administrators should have been armed. This is not an unexpected response from the right."

Yes, and Rep. Gohmert excitedly explained that if the school principal has just been armed with a "M4" (whatever that is) she could have ... "taken his head off."

Wow. Just the sort of rhetorical imagery we need from our representatives, in the aftermath of horrific violence, and a time of national tragedy; and preferably a time when we should be having a measured and rational national dialog).

But we can't blame anyone but ourselves, that people like this are in congress. We elect them, so we get the government we deserve.

IF YOU TAKE AWAY OUR 2nd AMMENDMENT WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DEFEND OUTSELVES AGAINST A HORRIBLE GOVERNMENT...

WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Newsflash: You're bushmaster .223 and sig sauer aren't going to protect you from a "horrible government" either! Unless you think you can shoot down a predator drone with a handgun.

What CAN, and DOES protect you from a "horrible government" in this country is the most novel and enlightened form of protection ever constructed by man, that is a ballot box...

Always the cry of those who want to delay the discussion so that anger fades and nothing is done.

NO. Not this time, Starlight. We discuss this NOW!

Ceasar Augustus: you said "welcome to FR. they dont care what the cause of this tragedy is,"

The cause of the tragedy was that a mentally ill person gained access to guns and used them to kill.

We need to get guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

Anyone who has the intention to kill is, by definition, mentally ill.

The act of having a guns indicates that you intend to kill.

We need to get guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

We need to get rid of guns, because anyone who has a gun is, by definition, mentally ill.

then Drowning Grover perhaps you can explain why the 2nd Amendment exists then.

What CAN, and DOES protect you from a "horrible government" in this country is the most novel and enlightened form of protection ever constructed by man, that is a ballot box...

yeah because paper will protect you from an armed police state. and No i dont say we have a police state either. but paper wont prevent a police state.

Most of the killing was done with a Bushmaster AR 15 assault rifle with a high capacity magazine (the killer had several).

We need to reform on several fronts: ending violent videogames that desensitizes kids to killing, more funding for mental health treatment, bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazine.

There are probably more reforms.

Children are more important than guns.

No one is coming for your guns, and we are no where near a "police state" or a dictatorial government take over.

DrowningGrover- really? because that what you are talking about is exactly what German mentality was before they went off the deep end. Also the same thing when China went off the deep end when the communist party took over....

Eric-913730 - ending violent videogames that desensitizes kids to killing, more funding for mental health treatment, bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazine.

What? you contradict yourself.

No one is coming for your guns and we are no where near a "police state" or a dictatorial government take over.

What you just proposed is just what you said it was not, special people today....

edgarw,

Government shall not inhibit the free exercise of religion... and here we go... secularists have taken it out of schools.

NO ONE is prohibiting you from exercising your right to practice a religion.

But nowhere in the Constitution does it say that one group of people who believes in a specific religion has the right to impose it on another group (or groups) of people who may believe in a very different religion or in no religion at all. And it definitely does not give the people who believe in that specific religion the right to force it upon other people in a public school or any other public setting. Remember the rest of the First Amendment? It's not only about religion. There are three rights, and they were purposely enjoined in the same Amendment. One of them is the right to free speech. And my free speech says I don't want your religion forced on me. It's very simple, Edgar. Which is to say, even a simple person should be able to understand it.

I am a Baby Boomer who has lived a life in tragedy " that could not happen ". I am older than the President and have known living veterans as far back as the Spanish American War. Lots of things that could not happen, happened. We, of my generation did not have the foresight apparently to design protections which could not be breached. Adam Lanza is the equivalent of our grandchild, the child that education, medical advances, financial wellbeing and social programs was to give a life of reasonable peace and bliss. The community setting in which he lived was an example of social harmony with any number of advantages paid for with tax dollars and the school of hard knocks. But we all acknowledge that, " that which could not happen ", happened, for all the studies, and brain scans, and social programs and prayers, the protective barriers were breached.

There is no shortage in history about protections being breached. This is a social example of the Titanic. I do wish the generations following mine, good luck with their problem analysis and solutions, but like the Titanic, or the Exxon Valdez, there is something about The Uncertainty Principal which allows for the defeat of all protections. With the great inventions of my generation came huge social problems as well.

dirp, So in your warped mentality, every policeman and soldier is mentally ill because they have guns. Please leave the discussion to the adults.

Caesar, it is a cultural problem with political solutions that could, at the least, reduce the numbers of mass shootings and shootings in general. The Constitution and the Supreme Court rulings made it political.

In Florida, again in Florida, a few weeks ago another teenager was fatally shot for no reason other than that the shooter objected to the loud music being played on a car radio; the teenagers in the other vehicle had no guns. Instead of walking away, the man opened fire on the car, fatally wounding one young man in the back seat. Had that shooter, just as with Robert Zimmerman, not had a concealed weapons permit and not carried the gun everywhere he went, odds are that the worst would have been a fist fight. The teenagers were at the convenience store purchasing snacks and soft drinks; the shooter was purchasing more liquor after having been to a wedding reception where liquor was served.

@Gimdan, I am not for banning all guns, just these types of guns.

You don't need a rifle that fires 45 rounds per minute to hunt anything. You don't need armor piercing bullets. You don't need high capacity magazines to protect yourself or your family.

Hitler is not here, and we have all learned what we needed to from that event.

We need to curb this culture of violence.

More guns isn't the answer.

No, the framers of our Constitution probably didn't envision semu-automatic weapons...but they also knew enough not to specify the types of firearms we would be permitted the right to own. The weapontry owned at the time was sufficient to fight against our enemies - the British. They had similar weapons to those of the civilian soldiers. Today we have many enemies or potential enemies that are heavily armed with weapons beyond the imagination of our founding fathers. One of the reasons we have the right to bear arms is so that we may rise up against a tyrannical government if we needed to...just how would a 6 shot revolver hold up against an automatic weapon used against us to subdue us? Just how can we hold off a criminal intent on invading our home if we cannot match their fire power - the police wouldn't get there in time to help us - we would be dead.

As for the lack of God in our schools comment - I think the intent is that once upon a time, there was such a thing as personal responsibility. Once upon a time, people believed in God and our eternal soul. Once upon time we believed that we would be judged harshly and go to Hell and Hell was somewhere we definitely didn't want to go. In that respect, God is absent. Adults fear the youth of today - how easy is it for them to claim abuse and upend our lives (I have seen it happen over and over - and it has always been lies or threats of making these claims in order to control adults. Fear of disciplining children because they might like the other parent better - especially in broken homes...we have given children too much power and too much freedom.

Guns are not the problem here. THe problem is our culture. Why are these crimes not committed by young girls? WHy only boys? The CDC released a study after the Assault Weapons Ban expired - they could find no evidence that the ban had ANY impact on reducing crime.

And further, Edgar (as though it needs to be said--if only you would do a little bit of thinking on your own. . .), why is that there are countries all around the world in which prayer and the teaching of religion does not take place in schools, and yet there is no violence in those schools? Hmmm? You've got a mind like a steel trap: nothing gets in.

I'm a gun owner, know the political game here, and clearly see the need to address the problem... however

"assault weapons" are a appearance / style sort of classification.... when we ask for a ban on this weapon type we are doing the equivalent of banning all red cars because someone got hit by a red car. This style of weapons does the same function as many other types of rifles... it just looks military... there are infinite models of weapons and the industry will just get around whatever definitions get written.

military specific features like automatic fire, armor penetrating ammunition, and explosives are already heavily regulated and not available at retail in the US.

bear in mind there was an assault weapons ban and ban on large magazines for 10 years... and there was no reduction in crime or gun violence during that period...

and when we blindly ask for a ban of the first catchword we can come up with, Congress will throw us a bone like they did with the first ban, and nothing meaningful will happen, and they'll get their wish of this hot potato going away

I urge anyone serious about reducing gun violence not to play into "assault weapons ban" trap.... ask your Congress for reform on things likely to have greater impact like:

- nationally unified medical records database to assist background checking

- nationally unified state and federal criminal records to have a one stop shop for criminal background checking

- a national 'prevent violence' 800 number where anyone can call and get immediate action on people they are worried about

- national rules about the security of schools

the answer is not

- bans on specific weapons, because they clearly do not work

- ban on all weapons because it will never happen politically...

- taxing the hell out of people because thats just a bad idea

when we ask for an assault weapons ban, Congress and the gun industry literally laugh at our naivete... ask for something that makes sense, and many gun owners will be with you....

Clearly, the time has come to stop the slaughter of our children on the alter of the Second Amendment. This has got to stop. Strict laws limiting gun ownership must be enacted and enforcement measures must be put into effect. It's the right thing to do.

Steeler2103:

You make some valid points, none of which deal with my narrative, but nice try,....we have some lovely parting gifts. It is not I who need the "professional help".

The point is that you can secure a firearm for immediate use even if you intend to use it for domestic defense. "Quick Access" safes are one such avenue. I don't feel the need to surround myself with unsafe firearms, but I certainly hope you do.... :o)

I think your opinion that most mass shooters are "Liberal" is just another right wing evasion tactic from the "party of personal responsibility". Most right wingers/Republicans are merely scared little people which is why they are so susceptible to fear talk: "The brown people are coming to get you, teachers are coming to destroy your state's economy, the arabs are going to kill you,.....etc..."

And if Laughtner was not a Pubbie, then why didn't he shoot up a Pubbie political gathering? Mean to tell me there's a lack of Pubbies in Arizona?

Get serious.

The Constitution and the Supreme Court rulings made it political.

that makes NO sense. the constitution (you know that piece of paper libs seem to hate) made it law. it was George Zimmerman btw and he was assaulted from behind and if it werent for the gun, Mr Zimmerman's skull would likel be bashed in and possibly dead and Trayvon, Obama's surrogate son would still be at large. Jody dont bother with me with your culture. Yours mirrors USSR or Nazi germany where you believe large gov is the solution.

Hey Sailcat, good luck with that.

@Lorielle,

The assault weapon ban left 24 million assault weapons in the US, it also had holes in it for high capacity magazines.

Here is an article on the effects of the assault weapon ban in 1994. If you look at the graph, we have a huge spike in these shootings with these weapons.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/

The road will be longer if nothing is done now.

I have changed my avatar image today to a visual expression of the grief and downright confusion I feel for the precious lives lost to senseless violence this past week.

Any other Newsvine contributor who shares my thoughts, and who wishes to join in my visual display, and to present a clear and unified message to our Congressional and State legislative representatives that "things must change" are most welcome to click on my black ribbon image, and copy it from my Newsvine page to also make it your own.

Most of our words in these discussion threads will be missed by those we have empowered to act; but as goes the old adage "A picture is worth a thousand words." Let's send a message which can't be ignored.

Peace. Love. Give us guidance.

@oldhamilton, read the effects of the last ban here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/

Rates were much lower. How do you explain the spike in 2010?

Why do we need rifles with huge magazines that fire 45 rounds per minute?

The UK and Australia have murder rates 4 times lower than the US and they ban weapons. Explain that?

"ask for something that makes sense and many gun owners will be with you.."

Like I care if you are or are not.

Some of you are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the trough, to understand that a right does not exist without a compelling responsibility.

It is the responsibility of gun owners to get the hell out of the way of responsible legislation that keeps the rest of us safe. ALL of the Bill of Rights have limits. The most famous of those, and the simplest for the gun owner to understand is about the First Amendment "You can't scream FIRE in a theater where none exists and be protected from prosecution when panic ensues."

You can't allow this carnage and slaughter of babies either. And I frankly do not give a damn if gun owners like that or not.

I heard some people who were interviewed say that people should have more guns, not less. Then, they said, crazy folks would be too afraid to go shooting people for fear of being shot themselves.

Does that actually make sense to anyone? Gun fights and shoot outs with would-be psychos?

I think the better idea would be to out law assault rifles.

Do people really need military-style rapid firing machine guns, like our soldiers use when they're at war?

To respond to Jody's comments stating: Religion or the lack of religion in schools and public places has absolutely nothing to do with increased violence. A crazed individual killed his mother, took her guns and slaughtered 26 more. Clearly, you are religious; the Bible speaks of the devil and evil always at odds against God and good.

Religion or the lack of religion in schools and public places has.... is your opinion. It is not based on fact, nor is there any evidence supporting how you view it... but there is an increase of violence in these areas. How many school shootings have occurred in the recent past? How many other forms of violence are cropping up in this country? In the past week alone there have been how many murders in the streets? What just happened in Oregon? Colorado? Do you attribute these events to just random assaults? Jody, the increase in violence in this country is on the rise. What is the root cause?

While secularists will deny it in order to maintain their no religion stance, trouble is growing. I see the correlation and have been seeing it get worse as time passes.

In terms of the Australian assault weapon ban.

"As Wonkblog’s Sarah Kliff pointed out, Australia’s law appears to have curbed gun violence. Researchers in the British Medical Journal write that the ban was “followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides.”

If they can do it, so can we.

steelers2013: EVERY person who has the intention to buy a gun "for protection" does so with the intention, stated or unstated, that they will, if given the opportunity, KILL A PERSON.

Of course, if you go into a gun store and state your reason for buying the gun is "I'm going to kill someone" they would not sell to you, they know you are not mentally stable.

Yet that is your purpose in having a gun, you intend to kill someone. If you do not intend to kill someone with the gun, there is no reason for you to have a gun. The entire premise of the gun industry is that it will allow you to kill, very efficiently. The more you spend, the more efficient you will get at killing.

THAT is not a stable mental state.

We need to get guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable.

In order to do that, we need to get rid of guns.

Getting rid of the ones that kill very efficiently, high bullet magazines and assault type weapons, would be a good start.

STOP GLORIFYING VIOLENCE

A 20 year old, shot his mother, at home, and then invaded Sandy Hook Elementary School, where he killed 20 first-graders and six adults, firing 30-round clips from a .223 Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle before taking his own life.

How many bullets?

“Hundreds,” Connecticut State Police Lt. J. Paul Vance said Sunday.

.

.

.

A copy-cat psycho-path wanting notoriety will try to out-do Aurora and Newtown by doing something more heinous.

1. Get some backbone POLITICIANS!!!
2. Mothers, woman and other concerned citizens are a far more powerful voting block than the stupid NRA. Put that power to use. Stop the madness of a GUN CULTURE that the NRA has given us!!!

ALL of the Bill of Rights have limits.

care to define the 2nd one then? im sure you can NDD10

Pat from Boston - we'll disagree. No words can describe how he managed to put smiles on these little faces. But he did. I believe THEY put the smile on his face.

I'm amazed that with the carnage that took place on Friday, there are still people who have so little value for human lives they are STILL refusing to acknowledge that assault weapons have NO PLACE in a civilized society. They are not for protection or hunting - they are made for one purpose and one purpose only - to kill human beings.

When you feel you can stand up and argue about the right to have such weapons, you have already lost the argument becuase you have lost your humanity. No ifs, no ands, no butts, - you are missing a core value that most people have.

No one wants to take your handguns or hunting rifles but assault weapons and clips carrying more than 10 bullets are only used to kill. When you fight to keep these weapons you know you are intentionally fighting for the right for some lunatic to kill human beings. There is no other argument for owning such weapons.

So for those of you here or anywhere else who are defending the ownership of these weapons, you are telling us you have no problem with people killing mass numbers of other people - that it doesn't matter to you - and that children are fair game.

You're pathetic human beings. There are no other comments for people like you.

Blaming this tragedy on gun ownership is a copout. An excuse. We have owned guns since this country was founded. This tragedy was caused by one thing "crazy". You can't ban "crazy". You can't mandate "crazy".

But the question is WHY the sudden rash of increased tragedies. It is NOT due to gun ownership - gun ownership has been fairly constant over the last 50 years so can't blame on that. Must be something else.

In summary we have stopped teaching faith in God, respect for elders, discipline, and moral values. We no longer allow kids to play "cowboys and indians" (like I did 40+ years ago and turned out fine) stating this "incites" violence but yet teach our children that moral values are not necessary whether it be premarital sex, homosexuality, or treating elders with respect. We teach children God doesn't exist and we were "created" by some random event and evolved from an oven mitt but yet AFTER the massacre have 4 days of prayer vigil and constant reminders, even by our president, that we are all created in God's image and these poor souls are now sitting with God in heaven. Wouldn't it be better to have the prayer in school BEFORE these events rather than after?

And we have video games so realistic you can now be IN the game killing dozens of people and wonder why these "crazy people" then shoot up malls, schools, and churches? Now MOST can separate the reality from fantasy in these games but all it takes is a small handful that DON'T and you have what we have seen over the last couple years.

You really need to open your eyes and realize these tragedies are occurring more and more NOT because guns exist (they always have) but because we have lost our moral compass and children are no longer taught about God and the difference between right and wrong. Gun ownership is NOT the problem. We have ALWAYS owned guns. But it is the "crazy" we have have created and taking away or limiting guns is not the answer nor the solution. That is a copout. That is an excuse. That is not a solution. That will do nothing to solve these problems.

You need to first identify the PROBLEM!! Identify the problem THEN find a solution. And not teaching our children morality nor religion and then giving them access to realistic video games IS the problem. Taking away guns do NOTHING if you don't approach and identify the PROBLEM!!

My daughter's high school as well as the other schools in our district have two armed policemen that patrol while school is in session.

Yes we had a bunch of idiots call in hoax bomb threats 9 times in 8 days at a cost of around 22 thousand dollars each time, but the fact remains, they were hoaxes and we have very little problems on our campuses.

If we can afford to bail out banks/auto industries/othehr countries, then we can damn well afford to have patrolmen on all of our campuses and dump more money into our mental health facilities.

haggisbingo-2225582

1. Get some backbone POLITICIANS!!!
2. Mothers, woman and other concerned citizens are a far more powerful voting block than the stupid NRA. Put that power to use. Stop the madness of a GUN CULTURE that the NRA has given us!!!

Here you go again, and still with NO proof! Let me guess you'll once again call me a Karl Rove lovin Romney supporting Republican right?

the mass shooters in Arizona(congresswomen), Colorado(aura theatre), and now Conn., (school massacre; ALL HAD ONE THING IN COMMON, they were all mentally ill, totally nuts, and all should have been in a mental hospital for safety and treatment; there is were the problem is, 390 million persons if only one out of a million is mentally deranged that means, there are potential 390 nuts out there planning to kill in mass.

So....when all the guns are gone and the latest headline goes on about the mass knifing or blunt force trauma what then. Ban all baseball bats? Ban all pointy things? Ban fire and poison and acid and plastic bags and ty wraps?

The bigger issues are why do the freaks get it in their heads to commit these attrocities. The means they use is secondary to the fact that they are "messed up in the head".

There will always be some means to do others harm if that's what you ultimately choose to do.....mybe at least some credence should be given to the base issue here. Maybe it's a systemic stress response brought on by factors we aren't even fully aware of....not all of us anyway.

then Drowning Grover perhaps you can explain why the 2nd Amendment exists then.

Because when the Constitution was drafted, the founding fathers were trying to protect a fledgling nation that had just thrown off the shackles of a foreign monarch, "arms" were single shot muzzle loaders, and we had no standing army with the very real threat of another foreign army invasion (ala the War of 1812). None of these conditions exist today. The 2nd amendment, as envisioned by the founding fathers, has a completely different meaning and historical context than how it's talked about today (and for the record, I am NOT advocating for it's repeal).

yeah because paper will protect you from an armed police state. and No i dont say we have a police state either. but paper wont prevent a police state.

I see you have little faith in Democracy. The move to a police state is typically very gradual, and voting is a VERY powerful weapon in staving that off. The other most important and powerful weapon we have in fighting against a police state in this country is the united states military, it's ALL VOLUNTEER! You'd have to be completely paranoid to think that young men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan would turn their rifles on their friends and family members simply because they're instructed to by a commander in chief.

I stand by my assertion, VOTING is the most powerful weapon we have in this country and you have to be pretty cynical to discount its power (this was the founding father's most lasting genius).

Jack in Portsmouth your insults do not phase me. I can see you are a typical liberal who believes that insulting your opponent actually works. Your liberal views are weak. First you try to use logic that does not fit the argument. Second you try to correlate other countries with ours. Neither are valid arguments. I can sense you are grasping at straws to hold your own, but don't realize the straws are broken.

We could continue to throw barbs at each other, but I find you are a waste of time. I'll bet many others feel the same way. I've noticed that it is you who feels the need to respond... funny how nobody else is responding to you. I wonder why... lesson learned, I think I'll join the others and simply ignore you.

edgarw,

I see the correlation and have been seeing it get worse as time passes.

That is exactly what I was saying in my response about your lack of logic at #1.46. A correlation is just that; a correlation, and nothing more. It proves nothing. It's like saying there weren't any monkeys in the trees at the time there was little violence in schools, but now there are monkeys in the trees and there is violence in schools, therefore the influx of monkeys have caused the violence. Well, a correlation does exist there, but it doesn't mean the monkeys caused the violence.

I'm glad my insults don't "phase" you. You did go to school, didn't you?

you try to correlate other countries with ours. Neither are valid arguments.

Yeah, right. That's because we follow the One True God, and they don't.

You should quit now, Edgar, because your remarks just become stupider and stupider.

And the part the NRA mental midgets always miss due to their inability to read are these words.

"A well regulated militia".

Bugger all of them.

Guns don't have rights. Kids and people do.

@1SGFitzsWife4ID

you'll once again call me a Karl Rove lovin Romney supporting Republican right?

if the shoe fits...

it doesn't take an Einstein to know the vast majority of mothers and women are for preventing what happened at that elementary school - WHATEVER IT TAKES

From the best - good comments and insight Ron, Indiana, Frank Grimes and others.

to the worst

Augustus - Only one so rabid as you would mock sensible gun control, laugh at the futility of it all and lie that sensible gun control measures are equivalent to what fascist and totalitarian regimes did. So your response to this is to go out and buy some Assault weapons? Thankfully not all "so called" independents think like you.

Blaming Obama on this too? Take your snark and laughter with you, Spanky did it better anyway, but even he wouldn't publish Sl^%&* like yours. Go ahead call me an angry lib, hypocrite whatever I don't care. After a tragedy like this, you are the type of guy who comes in here rubbing salt in the wounds. Someone like you deserves no respect and none will be given.

ProBusiness - You hit the nail right on the head. The root problem is the lack of morality and the teaching of it. Families aren't doing their part... schools aren't doing their part... government is definitely not doing it's part... and then you have people that simply want to blame guns. If there were no guns, there would be no more shootings. I wonder how many guns Timothy McVeigh used to kill as many people as he did. Maybe we should ban fertilizer along with the guns. In the craze to remove guns, I guess knives don't kill either... or clubs, or swords, or even rocks.

It's not the implements that kill, it's people with zero sense of accountability or morality. You are absolutely correct that we need to fix the root cause of the problem.

Sailcat - there are already plenty of "strict laws and enforcement" concerning gun ownership. If a gun owner does NOT secure his/her guns then they are liable for any harm that occurs from misuse of the gun. If a person: has been treated for mental illness, has had a felony, has been convicted of domestic violence, then they can not own a gun LEGALLY. There are a few more things that will get you a lifetime ban on gun ownership also. The thing is, a criminal, by the very definition of the word, does not give one hoot about the law. The same thing applies to someone who is mentally disturbed. They are not in their right mind and therefor do not think that what they are doing is wrong. The laws and enforcement are there.

I would make a comparison to our immigration laws but the enforcement isn't there on those.

@Oldhamletman...

That makes sense.... most people do not understand that we don't have assault rifles available to us.. They just LOOK like a military weapon.. Truth is all guns shoot and can kill. I use to shoot competition and use to shoot faster and more accuate with a revolver.. And with speed loaders I kept pace with clip feds.

I want to thank you for having the courage and sence of urgency to put our need for God and His comfort in our nation. God's love is all around and there arew so many people these days trying so very hard to keep God out of our lives. My prayer is that more people will have the courage to stand up and profess their faith in God our Father. I also pray for the families and friends of all those inocent victims of this horrible act of violence. God has the answers to all our questions we just need to go to the love letter He has given to us , the bible. I pray that God places faithful Christians in the lives of all those effected by these senceless acts. We were not the only ones effected by violence. We need to remember those in China who were effected by violence as well. We need God in our lives without God we continue to spiral out of control. He is our only hope! If we will repent, pray, turn from our wicked ways, and seek God. God will be faithful to heal our land. And we as a nation need that so desparately. We need more Christians who are not afraid to show their faith. Thank you again and may God bless each and everyone of you.

dirp,

Your comment makes it sound as though all of humanity is nothing but crazed killers waiting for the 'opportunity' to kill.

Since you are a human... I can only assume that you too are simply waiting for the opportunity to kill. Is this true?

If not, then what makes you different from the rest of us?

NO. I don't believe that everyone that buys a gun would kill if given the 'opportunity'... But I do believe they buy those guns to defend their 'person and property' which our forefathers said was their right.

I own guns. Some long rifles and some handguns. (no AR's). I do not relish the thought of having to use one of them on another person... but... if that person was out to hurt one of my loved one... I would use it. I hope that the gun itself will deter an attacker... but if not... well... I hope I never have to find out.

One final thought...

When the terrorists used airplanes to kill thousands on 9-11... did you call for the fan of all aircraft?

You gun nuts make me want to vomit

http://newsok.com/3-year-old-dies-after-accidental-shooting-near-guthrie/article/3738015

sorry... ban not fan... 8-P

---------------------------

Hey haggisbingo... you know what makes me want to vomit? Irresponsible parents that don't take precautions to lock their guns away from children...

That and bleeding hearts that blame the guns.

newday - you need to read the whole 2nd Amendment not just part of it. You take the part about the militia out of context.

A well regulated militia being the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in Heller, stated:

Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset. This contrasts markedly with the phrase “the militia” in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the “militia” in colonial America consisted of a subset of “the people”— those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people”.^[116]

The "people" that the 2nd Amendment applies to are all the "people" not just those belonging to a militia.

Mruseurhead

In reality HUSTON fetus is simply a description of a cycle of development of an unborn child........not LESS THAN.

Late term fetuses with sufficient brain development can reasonably be thought of as "children," which is why there have been restrictions on late-term abortion since Roe v. Wade. Early term fetuses lacking the key capability of consciousness of any sort are not children. It's disgusting that people try to equate abortion with the fear and pain of experienced by thinking human beings like the ones who died in this latest gun massacre.

God has the answers to all our questions we just need to go to the love letter He has given to us , the bible.

I must have missed the part in the Bible about what to do, legislatively, when an armed nutcase walks into a 21st century school, with a 21st century weapon.

What a cop out. This has nothing to do with religion and religion will not solve it. Nor will God. Anyone's God. for that matter. It did not cause it, the lack of it did not cause it. It has nothing to do with anything except how you choose to personally grieve.

You want to know what will fix it??? Using the brains your God gave you in order to find a solution and a balancing of rights.

Pray away the gay. Pray away the violence. Pray away the poverty...

Pray away the praying. All you want to do is pray, that's fine. But keep your praying where it belongs and doesn't get in the way of solutions. Your God and your religion will NEVER be the solution to this.

Yellowdog-Mark D ....

Your post at 1.131 .... all I can say is Thank You! Ceasar's posts today are truly disgusting

Bruce -848280 wrote:

"Robert in Oregon: I was a member of the Oregon House of Representatives for five terms in the 1980's. One of the most disheartening events during my tenure came as a result of a bill sponsored by every level of law enforcement in the state - State Police, County Sheriffs, local Chiefs of Police. The bill would prohibit the sale or possession of armor piercing ammunition. These rounds are useless for hunting or target shooting, but will penetrate body armor easily.

The NRA vehemently opposed the bill on the premise that it was an attempt by liberals to restrict ammunition today, and ban guns tomorrow.

The bill died in committee."

Hello Bruce,

Thank you for your long service to our state.

Bruce, I wrote a lengthy letter to Ginny (Burdick) this morning. I know that she shares my concern that things must change. The horrific violence of this past week which has played-out on our television screens needs to be the shock-to-our national (and state) consciousness that causes us to finally take action. The faces and names of those 20 precious children need to be etched in our memories until we get this job done for all of the other six and seven year-old children of our nation, to reduce the chance of a recurrence of this horror. And when we have finished this task then we can put them to rest. But until we do, we ourselves do not deserve to rest.

Our 2013 state legislative assembly convenes in a few short weeks, and we need to keep this message fresh, that the people want the Oregon Legislature to try to find solutions. In my letter to Ginny I noted that I know she shares my concern; as she made very clear last week following the murders at Clackamas Town Center Mall. I have many more letters remaining to write.

Bruce, I was born in Salem, and as a 59-year life-long resident of our wonderful state it is my ardent hope that Oregon Republicans and Democrats can come together to draft groundbreaking bipartisan gun regulation legislation for our state in the upcoming 2013 Legislative Assembly. Legislation which can serve as the model for our nation.

The Oregon of my youth, in the days of Governor Tom McCall, was known for the progressive foresight and thoughtfulness of our legislation. And Governor Straub was a close friend of my Dad, and I went to school with his daughter in West Salem; so I was thoroughly "schooled in policy" until it came out of my ears.


During those times we Oregonians were nationally heralded for our ability to work together, in a bipartisan manner for a better Oregon, and by our legislative actions (beach bill, billboard signs ban, bottle bill, etc.) we collectively exhibited our respect for, and our pride in our state.

In respect for, and memory of all of those precious souls lost last week to gun violence, I hope that we can once again set aside partisanship (tell the NRA to "take a hike") and come together on this very important issue; and once again be a leader and set the example for our nation.


Regards,
Robert.

TO ALL NEWSVINE READERS: You are welcome to copy my memorial ribbon avatar to use as your own. "A picture is worth a thousand words." Let's send a collective visual message to our elected representatives that things must change. We owe it to our children.

Layton (& Yellowdog)

Your post at 1.131 .... all I can say is Thank You! Ceasar's posts today are truly disgusting

Ditto. Excellent post.

Sarah,

What a cop out. This has nothing to do with religion and religion will not solve it. Nor will God. Anyone's God. for that matter. . .

I'm only copying part of your post, but fully agree with the whole of it. Well said!

Newday: So you were the only person left that didn't get the memo and STILL don't understand that is a lame and illogical argument? "A well regulated militia" MEANS the people. The people at that time WERE the militia therefore when you reference "militia" you did NOT mean government you meant the people.

But a second explanation is to simply read the writings of the founding fathers themselves who WROTE the Constitution - for example Thomas Jefferson. He WROTE the Constitution so surely if he meant that government was the ONLY entity responsible to have guns then how do you relate to the following comments and writings BY Thomas Jefferson at other times:

1) "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government". So how could Thomas Jefferson have MEANT that government was ONLY allowed to have weapons when you read that statement?

Or how about this one:

2) "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man" (actually was Thomas Jefferson quoting a comment by Cesare Beccaria). So how could Jefferson had MEANT government's right to arms ONLY if this quote CLEARLY means the CITIZEN has the right to defend himself?

Or this one:

3) "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it". Who does he mean by "take it"? The government of course. So why would he say that the Second Amendment is only applicable if government tries to take it away IF government was the only entity entitled to it in the first place? No, it means "the people".

And finally:

4) "Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not". What he clearly meant is guns are needed to protect liberty from tyranny and the countries that evolve INTO tyranny are those who have taken away the right to own a gun. And we see that constantly in history. Certainly doesn't sound like someone who "wrote" in the Constitution something that meant "government is the ONLY entity allowed to own guns"

It is called "history". I suggest you read a little history before repeating a comment that most rational people clearly know the intention of.

Sarah: If you don't want to pray that is fine THAT is your right under our Constitution. But the argument is WHY do we see more violence today than we did 50 years ago. Gun ownership has NOT changed much in 50 years so you CAN'T blame the increased violence on gun ownership. And if THAT is the case then gun control will not be a factor.

But if you dispute my comments as to what has changed in the last 50 years then I would be interested to hear why YOU believe we have more violence than we did 50 years ago. THAT is the discussion we should be having which is WHY!!

Gun ownership is a non-factor. We DIDN'T have mass tragedy and massacres 50, 40 , or even 30 years ago when gun ownership, as a percentage of population, was actually higher. So something has changed. And clearly not gun ownership. So if you disagree with me that fine but why do YOU think we have more massacres and violence than we did even 30 years ago? What has changed?

Backhouse - 26 people are dead tragically. how many people die in Chicago every weekend by gunfire? Over 50 where shot on one weekend over the summer. Chicago has one of the strictist gun laws in America. Hows that working! And this is the fault of Republicans, you truly are an @!$%#! As a conservative I hate guns, I wish some one could promise me that they would all go away. But what are the odds of that happening? The hardest part of this tragedy is lack of something to do about it! Our country was founded by death by guns. How many wars did we fight, to gain our independence. Some of Our Founding Fathers dualed to the death (Hamilton). There are roughly a billion guns in America. Please tell me how we do away with them? Blame? The mother knowing her son was odd, didn't lock up her guns! Teachers and staff at his High school of 13 years could not intervene and try to help him. Ultimately this is his responsibility, not others. A tough talking President did nothing for me yesterday, because there is nothing you can do!

I don't have any answers. I don't know why anyone "needs" an M-4 replica (Bushmaster is the particular manufacturer and .223 is the caliber of the firearm) Apperantly it is legal for me to own one. I'm not a supreme court justice nor am I one of the founding fathers. I don't speak for either. I AGREE THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE.

We've allowed our childrens minds to become pretty twisted. We have all this great technology and we are more isolated now than we ever were. We're all over exposed to violence, sex and immorality day after day. Ever seen the video games that kids play? There are video games where rape and sexual assault occur. When did that become entertaining let alone something a kid should do in a game? Ever wonder what they're doing on their electronic babysitter? We're raising a generation of sociopaths.

Again, I agree something needs to be done. I am just as frustrated and broken hearted as anyone else. I'm tired of gun owners losing control of their firearms. I'm tired of people picking and choosing their rights without any resposibility. I'm well beyond tired of small children not only losing their lives but the surviving children losing their innocense.

I'm certain that some fairly stringent gun control laws and restrictions will take place. When you get gun control what will you do? If you think you're even close to finished when you get that, you're either lazy or deluded.

stupidhuman

So....when all the guns are gone and the latest headline goes on about the mass knifing or blunt force trauma what then. Ban all baseball bats? Ban all pointy things? Ban fire and poison and acid and plastic bags and ty wraps?

When was the last time you heard of a "mass knifing" with a death toll like the one in Connecticut? I read one article about a recent rash of knife attacks at grammar schools children in China. There have been, unfortunately, several people killed in those attacks but the death toll was never anything close to the one in Newtown.

newdayDAWNING...RETURNED

"ask for something that makes sense and many gun owners will be with you.."

Like I care if you are or are not.

Some of you are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the trough, to understand that a right does not exist without a compelling responsibility.

It is the responsibility of gun owners to get the hell out of the way of responsible legislation that keeps the rest of us safe. ALL of the Bill of Rights have limits. The most famous of those, and the simplest for the gun owner to understand is about the First Amendment "You can't scream FIRE in a theater where none exists and be protected from prosecution when panic ensues."

You can't allow this carnage and slaughter of babies either. And I frankly do not give a damn if gun owners like that or not.

And you wonder why people feel the need to have weapons to protect themselves. You are saying, "I don't care what you think, you're going to do what I feel is best and get over it, your opinion does not matter".

Coming from the party of "tolerance". You are the shining example of why people feel threatened. You act as if you know what's best for everything and are showcasing like a dictator. You don't care about any rational argument. It's "I know what's best and screw the rest of you". Why should anyone care what you "think" when you don't care what anyone else thinks?

Cars don't kill people. Bad drivers kill people. If you big-government liberals make me put seat belts in every car that I sell, you're going to kill jobs and hurt the middle class. Besides, numerous studies have shown that people can still die wearing seatbelts. Enforce the car laws we already have and no one will ever die, ever.

Besides, wars have killed more people than cars ever have. Why don't we start talking about abolishing war?

And anyway, if you take away their cars, people will still kill by running their bicycles willy-nilly into crowds of unsuspecting pedestrians. Did you ever think of that?

Next thing you know, you're going to come trying to take away my First Amendment rights, too. If I want to say that so-and-so commenter is molesting his own daughter, even knowing that it's a lie, well, by God I can not only stand on the street corner and say it, I can get a Rolling Stones-grade sound system and blast it whenever and wherever I want, without limit, because the First Amendment says so.

Leave my rights alone. Say no to seatbelts.

-or-

Sign this petition asking President Obama to urge Congress to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines: petitions dot whitehouse dot gov/petition/urge-congress-advance-federal-legislation-banning-sale-assault-rifles-high-capacity-magazines/ssgnNqVT?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Eric-913730

@oldhamilton, read the effects of the last ban here:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/

Rates were much lower. How do you explain the spike in 2010?

Why do we need rifles with huge magazines that fire 45 rounds per minute?

The UK and Australia have murder rates 4 times lower than the US and they ban weapons. Explain that?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the article you quoted supports my position largely...

the DOJ has done numerous studies of the ban... they, and that article you quote conclude that a)gun violence did not go down... b)that 'assault weapons' and large magazines had a very small participation in gun crimes

2010 spike - the previous assault weapons ban expired in 2004, so there's no correlation... the 'number of targets in mass shootings' chart makes sense because of the types of gun crimes committed... people are getting it into their heads that its OK to go into groups of people to commit these crimes.... thats a cultural thing mostly which I will discuss below

"huge magazines"- I don't know that we do need such magazines... but here is where your lack of knowledge about guns shows... when we say "large clips make it easy" we show a complete ignorance of the operation of these weapons... if a person who knows something about guns decides to do this... they would have no problem, using 10 round magazines allowed during the ban, using 5 magazines in one minute, 50 rounds.... anybody can fire 2 rounds a second with an everyday handgun... taking 2-3 seconds to change magazines... the same mechanics apply to rifles of all types including rifles with and assault / military appearance....

The UK and Australia: there are many differences between us and them.... the US has a problem with media and socialization that makes us a 'warrior society' and promotes violence to a much higher degree.... we have different legal systems where ours is more permissive of parole because of overcrowding... they don't have a 2nd amendment as part of their culture.... they have nationalized healthcare that includes comprehensive mental healthcare that our country does not... they have well developed national surveillance systems... btw, it's no problem to get guns in either country... it's just a little hassle.... and London still has a high gun assault rate in spite of all that

reality is this

- we allow insurance companies to restrict mental healthcare to a great degree

- we have a violence / warrior based culture that allows these personality types to flourish without intervention

- we have a politically fragmented system of states that greatly inhibits background checking for mental health and criminal record

- we (in spite of 9/11) still have a very strong system of rights that inhibits the seizing of persons who are potentially dangerous and the search of people who might be

- we have shockingly lax security at schools

- we have a constitutional guarantee to weapons and a culture based on them

- if there was an assault weapons and large magazine ban in place today, it would not have stopped the perp from obtaining a rifle of equivalent function, or using handguns, and committing the same crime in the same timeframe... easily

I totally agree that something serious needs to be done... but if you guys squawk the "assault weapons ban" thing to Congress... you... are.... not.... going... to... make.... one.... bit....of ... difference

ProBusiness

Gun ownership is a non-factor. We DIDN'T have mass tragedy and massacres 50, 40 , or even 30 years ago when gun ownership, as a percentage of population, was actually higher.

What we didn't have back then was easy access to weapons with enough fire power to kill 26 people in a matter of a few minutes. Why this obvious cause and effect relationship escapes some people is hard to comprehend.

NVArt I have no problem with "all the people" being permitted to own a 6 foot long 30 pound muzzle loading weapon that has a rate of fire of about 1 round per minute and an accurate range of about 40 yards. The founding fathers never dreamed of the weapons we have today. The founding fathers did not consider slaves to be "people" either, we have gotten past that ( at lease most of us have.) We have been to the moon, we have split the atom, time to move weapon laws into the 21st century.

Folks, it's not about tools, weapons and/or firearms. Really, it isn't. It's about people doing violence. You are attacking the fruit of the problem, not the root of the problem. You can ban every gun in the US, and someone, somewhere will find some other weapon to do carnage with. It's not about the tool, it's about the persons using them. We need to stop being violent. We are accepting violence by diverting blame on things that are not the problem. People are violent! Address the problem with the people, not the tools.

I am an expert on the AK-47 and all assault rifles. The problem here is I have never seen one, held one or shot one, and yet I am an expert...How can that be anyone reading might ask. I am an expert because every day I hear all the gun nuts talking about them. Describing in detail how well it kills, how well it shoots, what a nice gun it is. I wonder how many of the AK-47 owners like that gun now. Everyone who owns one now has blood on their hands. I hope you are all proud now of those guns. Lastly, I have never been around guns but know enough that where ever guns go, so do problems and issues. Dead people seem to be everywhere guns are.

Thanks for reading :)

MM - The founding fathers did consider a government that would one day try and take away our rights. That is what the law is for and about. It is about the everyday citizen having the same access to the same guns that the government has.

So riddle me this, NRA zealots? Did the Founders leave a way to amend the Constitution?

Warning: Don't quote Scalia to me. He should never have been put on the court and has neither the intelligence nor the temperament to be there.

TM: YOUR post may be the most irrational yet. You in the NRA have been cowing the rest of the nation for generations.

Don't tell me what to tolerate. I do not tolerate the wholesale slaughter of babies. I am sorry to know that you do.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

You are dreaming if you believe not arming teachers and banning guns is the solution. Here is why: There are others weapons Like sticks with a heavy stone on one end, a knife, an ice pick and so no. All of these can cause mass causalities. None of these need to be reloaded.

If one or two staff members were armed and had training, situations like this can have a much better out come. Just think if the principal rushed into this seen with a hand gun, how different this would have turned out. She was very brave for giving everything she had to stop this but was no match in this kind of fight.

Remember god did not make man equal Colt did

Houston....

it's no problem for someone who has used or been trained with firearms to commit this crime using weapons that were readily available 40 years ago or during the assault weapons ban.... stack 15 ten round magazines in a bag with a pistol and go to a movie theater or school

whats different today is our culture....

40 years ago, nobody would have ever thought of walking into a first grade classroom and killing everyone

today, we have a culture that teaches it....

a medical system that doesn't recognize nor help the people who might do it....

an educational system that has not adapted its security to it.....

a political system that argues all the time instead of fixing glaring problems like comprehensive background checking and response to citizen concern

it is NOT simple cause and effect.... and that narrow minded view is why you are likely to get nowhere on fixing the real issues... you'll end up banning weapons that APPEAR a certain way... then some nut will walk in with two pistols and a shotgun like this kid had and kill 50 next year

People that love guns and manufacturers don't care, only relatives of the victims care. I don't see the need for assault rifles or other powerful weapons, I think a couple of handguns and hunting rifles are enough.

Crazy people will always do crazy things, but we can limit the extent of the killings, while allowing good people to own some types of weapons. It should be a compromise between what is logic and what is insane.

Houston: Your argument is flawed to begin with. Of COURSE we had guns 30 years ago that had the fire power to kill 26 people back then. Nothing has changed in the types of guns, caliber of ammo, or quantity held in clips. That is an incorrect and flawed argument.

So I go back to my initial comment and question. If gun ownership (and types of guns) have not changed much that how come we have significantly more of these types of tragedies than we did 30 years ago? Gun control is a copout. It is an excuse. But is NOT a reason and NOT a solution.

So I ask again, what has changed in the last 30 years? THAT is the question we should be having. Solve THAT question and we can find a solution that actually works.

*** But will there be follow-through? The president’s speech, however, didn’t offer any details of what he’d like to try to end future tragedies.

Why would he start now? All he needs to do is flap his gums and his worshipers fawn. It's almost Pavlovian.

mj899,

Just think if the principal rushed into this seen with a hand gun, how different this would have turned out.

This is just an idiotic statement. First, a hand gun is no match against a fully automatic weapon. Second, most police carry a hand gun, they are well-trained, and in a tension-loaded situation like this, miss their target more often than they hit it. Third, if the teacher misses her target, she might have hit one or more kids--do you really think a teacher, who loves and wants to protect the students in her care, would want to be put in that situation? Fourth--and this is the freakin' point, you idiot--why should this ever have to happen to being with? The last thing we want or need is gun-toting teachers.

There are a lot of people posting here who think they would know what to do in a situation like the one at Sandy Hook if only they had been there, but in reality don't have a clue. Lots of wannabes. Until the lead starts flying.

Are you this crazy?

Here's the argument in favor of semi-automatic assault rifles with high-capacity magazines and armor-piercing bullets.

Someday, the US government may become so tyrannical that it will be time for the American people to take a stand. These weapons will be our best chance to ultimately prevail against the full might of the US military. Because unlike us, it has aircraft carriers, submarines, stealth bombers, attack helicopters, body armor, night-vision goggles, armored personnel carriers, tanks, bunker-busting bombs and nuclear missiles.

While we will sometimes remind you that asymmetrical warfare and insurgencies against regimes with modern armies sometimes prevail, what we don't like to point out (thinking that, like us, you can't hold two thoughts in your head at the same time) is how bloody and costly it is to succeed at such an insurgency. And no one has tried it in this country in any serious way since 1865, when the only weapon the government had from the list in the preceding paragraph was submarines, and they were so primitive as to have been, essentially, non-factors.

We also won't tell you what the tipping point will be that will cause us to start killing policemen and soldiers sworn to defend this country. But don't worry, because we are the same people who have been warning you that Barry Hussein Obama is the most radical socialist president ever, and that he is bent on bringing this country to its knees and handing it over to his fellow islamofacists.

We are the same people who have been telling you that Obamacare is the worst assault on religious liberties in this country's history. Look, we've already bent over and taken the USA PATRIOT Act and the targeted killing of US Citizens without any lube. And we haven't yet even cracked open the talk about "Second Amendment solutions," but we will, just you wait.

Oh, yeah, nevermind on that last one.

My fellow Americans, if you believe that this is the reason for owning semi-automatic assault weapons with large-capacity magazines and armor piercing bullets, then in my mind, you have shown yourself to be mentally unfit for gun ownership.

The only ground I can see that would justify an armed uprising against the US government is if it suspended elections. But then we would not need "a well-regulated militia" to take down that government, because we now have something the founding fathers didn't. We have a standing army that would take down such a government.

You are dreaming if you believe not arming teachers and banning guns is the solution.

You mean the same teachers who have been subjected to salary slashing, union busting, pension robbing the right wing has been focused on destroying??

I have read some stupid @!$%# the last 3 days on this, you however win the PRIZE by far!

My daughter is a teacher, she has NO desire to add packing "heat" to her already overloaded job responsibilities!!!

This is just an idiotic statement

Jack,

It's beyond idiotic, it's plain INSANE!

Don't look now, we have a genuine "doomsday prepper" ^

Romilio: I am trying to keep this discussion on a higher level of debate because the question is WHY these types of tragedies are occurring more frequently. But it is not due to gun ownership (or types of guns) since they have changed very little in the last 30 years. Something is causing these tragedies to happen more frequently but it is not gun ownership - so what is it? We must address the problem and come up with a solution - to talk "gun control" is neither an argument nor a solution. We must address the problem.

But I DO want to make a comment because this whole "assault weapon" term is thrown around but those using it don't have any idea what that actually means. Here is what it means: nothing. zilch. nada. Because "assault weapon" is not a definition. Even when in effect many uninformed thought it "worked" - but it didn't do anything. Why? Because nowhere was there a specific definition.

Oh if it had a "bayonet" attachment it was called "assault" so manufacturers simply took the bayonet off. Other descriptions spoke of "assault looking" but what the heck does that mean? Not much. I have had a semi-automatic .22 rifle purchased while the "ban" was in effect. It is a simple rifle design and holds 16 bullets. But since not "assault looking" was legal. Try to get a .22 rifle at that time that held 16 bullets BUT looked "assault" and you couldn't buy. Difference? None. They LOOK different but I still bought a rifle that shot 16 bullets. Lastly, they LISTED certain brands and model numbers but, guess what, manufacturers simply came out with a slightly different design (still looking similar though) with a NEW model number and was now "legal".

In other words these types of laws are "feel good" laws and mean absolutely nothing. So when you hear "assault weapon" ban ask yourself what that is? If YOU can't define it you know our politicians couldn't define it. Our incompetent politicians could find their way out of a wet paper bag so getting them to DEFINE something is like asking a weatherman to DEFINE tomorrow's weather - it can't be done.

So, again, let's not waste time, money, and debate on gun control that has no bearing on the issue at hand. Let's identify WHY we are having more tragedies like this. I have my suggestions and thoughts but what we need is our politicians to debate WHY rather than turning this into a gun control battle. A gun control battle will not benefit us OR protect our children or society any better. Find out WHY we have more "crazy" and fix THAT!!

To those of you quoting the Constitution and the second amendment, your definitions differ from mine. That doesn't mean EITHER of us is more right than the other. It also does not permit EITHER of us to impose our will on the other. But it DOES mean we can have a debate and that compromise on principles - on both sides - will be a part of that debate.

To those of you specifying that God is required in societies or in schools, this is not about God or religion. If you want a theocracy, thee are other countires where you can go. Freedom of religion also means freedom FROM religion. Enforcing one religion is worse that having no religion. Do not equate morality with religion, especially a specific religion. God, religion or prayer in schools would not have prevented this.

To those of you quoting Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, the founding fathers, the Constitution, you are plainly quoting the passages and interpreting those passages to suit your narrative. What you fail to realize is that there are other interpretations. Many of you do not account for the difference in time, the difference in use of the language, the difference in meaning and interpretation. Look up the definition of "militia." Look up the definition of "regulated."

To those of your zealously protecting your "rights", consider that we ALL have rights. Many of those rights conflict each other. You will have to give up some of yours to allow for mine and vice versa. If you want to own a weapon, you should be prepared and willing to register it and yourself, buy insurance, store it responsibly and renew these safeguards periodically. Just like you do with your automobile.

To those of you demanding your rights to weapons, you must understand that rights and privileges come with consequences. You do not need assault weapons or ammunition magazines to protect yourself. If you are truly interested in protecting yourself from the government, you should be looking far beyond where you are looking or you should be looking for another place to live. The responsibility of a true citizen is to support and uphold the country and its government.

Jack and Feisty: I understand your disagreement with arming teachers but to call the comment of mj899 "idiotic" is childish. If you want to debate the topic then we should be able to argue and debate like adults. If you want to say you "disagree" that is fine - but "idiotic"? Only children use words like "idiotic".

Your arguments, however, are valid in that a handgun is not match is true (BTW, you said "fully automatic weapon" but that is incorrect - illegal to own fully automatic weapons. These weapons are semi-automatic). However, even if a handgun is not a match for a SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapon I would at least like the CHANCE to save my life. We hear of stories of teachers hiding under desks and in closets simply praying that they are not found by the shooter. But once the shooter finds them they can do nothing but look at the shooter and beg to be spared. To not even have the CHANCE to protect yourself? I don't call that idiotic. I call that being responsible. Or a teacher locking the door and barricading the door is smart but would feel more comfortable having a gun as well in the event the door is kicked in. I would much rather have the CHANCE to protect the children than to have no method of protection at all.

BTW, I teach at a college campus but also a Concealed Weapons Permit holder. If you see me at the grocery store I am armed. If you see me at Home Depot I am armed. If you see me at McDonalds I am armed. If you knock on my door at my house when I answer I am armed. But when I teach I am NOT armed since the laws don't allow. What makes me all of a sudden NOT responsible in the classroom rather than the grocery store, Home Depot, or McDonalds?

I feel most vulnerable when I am teaching. If something happened I would have to attack the shooter with a stapler and a tape dispenser. Sorry, I would much rather have at least the OPPORTUNITY to protect myself. Would I be successful? Only the good lord knows. But I would rather take my chances with my .357 than a stapler and tape dispenser.

And have you ever wondered as of late why MOST of these tragedies are occurring in schools? Could it be because the shooter is much more confident nobody would fight back nor have a gun? Pretty safe assumption you could cause massive damage and not have to worry about someone returning fire. When was the last time you heard of a massacre attack at a police station? Do you think that is a coincidence? Of course not. THAT would be suicide because you were CERTAIN someone would shoot back. But how easy it is to walk on a school campus and KNOW you can walk from one classroom to another without any risk of seeing something worse than a stapler or tape dispenser.

So if you want to have the argument of whether teachers should be armed I welcome that debate and we can disagree like adults but if you want to ACT like an adult and have a discussion LIKE an adult do not use comments like "idiotic". It negates any credibility from you to have a valid thought process and ability to have an adult discussion or debate.

Felden--Good points all.

Feisty--Yeah, he's played paintball and thinks he's seen it all.

ProBusiness,

illegal to own fully automatic weapons

Do you have any idea how easy it is to convert a semi-automatic weapon to fully automatic? Or how easy it is to get your hands on one? Nor is it "illegal" to own one; you can own one, but it has to be registered.

I stand by my "idiotic" remark, and I don't give a damn whether you like it or not. People are getting killed by shooters all across this country every day, and there are people on this site who would rather protect the gun owners than the innocents who are being slaughtered. That's selfish. And idiotic. And what's your problem that you have to wear a gun all the time?

dayDAWNING...RETURNED

So riddle me this, NRA zealots? Did the Founders leave a way to amend the Constitution?

Warning: Don't quote Scalia to me. He should never have been put on the court and has neither the intelligence nor the temperament to be there.

TM: YOUR post may be the most irrational yet. You in the NRA have been cowing the rest of the nation for generations.

Don't tell me what to tolerate. I do not tolerate the wholesale slaughter of babies. I am sorry to know that you do.

Don't put words into my mouth. I am not a member of the NRA nor do I support slaughtering babies, in any fashion, including abortion.

You try to tell everyone else what they should tolerate yet insist no one tells you what to tolerate. You have the mental capacity of a 3 year old.

Instead of answering my question, you throw out uncalled for assumptions. Why don't you read what I wrote and answer my question? How is it you should be able to tell people what they have to do, but people can't tell you what to do. You are such a hypocrite. You aren't looking for a solution, you're trying to force your agenda down everyone's throats whether they agree or not. Your attitude is what's wrong with this country. You don't care about reality, you only care about your views and will not respect anyone else's. Are you a member of congress?

Fielden: You went through a long list of "this is this" and "that is that" but at the end of the day you simply disagree. That is fine and we can have that debate. But we DO have a 2nd Amendment and we DO have clear comments and discussion of the founding fathers and what they MEANT with that amendment. To try a skew comments to justify you disagreeing is not beneficial. You can disagree with the amendment and you have the right to do that but you can't CHANGE the meaning of the 2nd Amendment to fit your needs.

But the bigger issue is you have not stated any opinion on WHY we have more massacres and tragedies over the last 5 to 10 years. You say it is not about God and religion. Okay, I disagree but you are welcome to that belief. But in a debate you must offer an alternative view. To simply disagree is the easy part - now offer your alternative view.

WHY are we having more massacres and tragedies? Certainly not gun ownership related since gun ownership has changed very little the last 50 years. Can't blame on gun ownership when these massacres and tragedies were NOT happening 30, 40, or 50 years ago. Gun control is a copout. That is an excuse. That is NOT a reason and is NOT a solution.

So let me hear your thoughts. Why do we have a society that has become so hateful and willing to kill children and innocent people when it did not happen before. It MUST be something within our society so what are your thoughts? Reasons?

I can see that we've got two of the three 'legs' of the GOP platform on display above; GOD and GUNS. I'm surprised that none of the RWers brought up the third leg, gays.

For you God nuts, I know it doesn't fit your narrow worldview, but purported belief in your Christian God doesn't guarantee good morals or judgement, and a belief in a different God (or no belief at all in a supernatural being) doesn't mean that you lack these things. Tying one to the other is merely an attempt to force your beliefs on others, and trying to make the connection that this lack of the Christian GOD in public life is the cause of all this is particularly distasteful given the Religious Rights' rabid vocal support for dismantling the social safety net for the poor, weak, and yes sick (mentally and otherwise) among us. And for all your pious mouthings about 'personal responsibility' and 'opportunity', you're the first people in line to restrict other's rights when they don't fit your beliefs.

What's changed? It's not God in schools or his lack, but the proliferation of high-power rapid-fire weapons and failing to teach morals in schools, which ironically is because the religious nuts objected to the secularization of those teachings. It wouldn't do to have the superstition stripped away from the moral message or their power would be lost. Unfortunately, it's been a pyrrhic victory for them and America. The deemphasizing of civics classes is another factor, as an uninformed citizenry is easier to manipulate, again something pushed by the religious right along with business interests. Many will rightfully blame 'popular culture' for this, forgetting the underlying mantra from the right that any legal business that can turn a profit is to be admired and raised up as a shining example of 'American opportunity' while carefully ignoring any harm to the social fabric it may cause.

As to a ban of certain weapons, I just don't see that working all that well. A very long-term solution at best, there's simply too many out there already for this. A ban on manufacturing does little to address current stocks, possibly banning all sales (used weapon private sales included) could prevent these falling into the wrong hands. The likely best answer is to make the owners of these weapons control them, with stiff penalties if they don't. You wish to own these, take personal responsibility.

It's time to take stock America; we don't need a theocracy to solve this, each citizen needs to look inside themselves and stop glamorizing violence, real or imagined. Or think that violence is a 'solution' when your beliefs are challenged. And address mental health and gun control issues, regardless of the costs. We can get control of this, we only need the will to do so.

One last note; the NRA has not said a single thing about this shooting other than one brief terse statement of 'no comment'.

Arm Teachers? If the principal would have been armed.....? Where do you live? Syria?

When you say crazy things, people tend to think you're crazy.

Jack: Don't be foolish. People don't covert semi-automatic to automatic easily. It is difficult. First you need parts that are VERY hard to find because nobody will mass produce something like that. Secondly, even if you DO have the part converting that to an automatic is an automatic felony. Responsible gun owners don't take that risk.

Additionally, "easy" to get your hands on one? Really? And just WHERE do you find an automatic weapon that once you pick it up can immediately be charged with a felony? You don't even have to shoot it. You don't even have to OWN it. Just pick it up and be caught and you can immediately be arrested for a felony. And, remember, us gun owners are the most law-abiding individuals in the country and we RESPECT our right to own a gun. So just HOLDING an automatic weapon opens the door to a felony conviction AND felons cannot own guns so your gun collection is gone. Your ability to go to the gun range is gone. Your ability to own a gun is gone. NO weapon is worth that risk.

And, lastly, it IS illegal to own one. unless you have an FFL/SOT which is not the EASIEST thing to get. You will be spending hundreds of dollars to start the process AND must have a business that is acceptable to attain an FFL (and that is not easy) so you either do not know the process or intentionally misleading others in this thread. You comment that you only need to "register" implies simply filling out a form. Nothing is further from the truth. It is INCREDIBLY difficult to do but, yes, can be done. But MUCH more complicated than just "register". And THEN you are responsible for that weapon. If you don't have it property secured, and someone got a hold of that, you would be facing SERIOUS issues.

So try not to mislead others like you did. If you are aware of the laws then list those accurately for the others to be aware but to not know and forward incorrect information OR intentionally mislead does nobody in this thread any good.

And then you prove your lack of knowledge AND immaturity with repeating your "idiotic" comment. Well, everyone now can make their own interpretation of who is really the idiot.

If you want to debate the topic then we should be able to argue and debate like adults. If you want to say you "disagree" that is fine - but "idiotic"?

The very last thing I need is a lecture from YOU of all people on civility!

Stick your condescending tone where the sun don't shine, Master of Misleading!

BTW: I called the comment INSANE, the very least you can do is quote me correctly!

And what's your problem that you have to wear a gun all the time

Safe bet, to compensate for other areas he's seriously lacking in... ;o)

Crazy Steve, it's not the teacher's responsibility to teach morals. The parents are the ones who teach their kids right from wrong. Your assessment is, in my opinion, part of the problem. People are spitting out kids and expecting someone else to raise them. When the parents relinquish control of their children and stuff like this happens, of course they're going to say "I just don't know why little Johnny lost control and shot innocent people". It's because the parents don't have a clue what's going on in their child's life, because they gave that control to someone else; they assume someone else is doing the job they should be doing. Then we go into the topic of some people should not be reproducing, but that's a whole different subject.

Pistol Instructor, I liked your two posts today.

Yeah, ProBusiness, let's just hold hands and smile and talk nice to each other while averting our eyes from the dead bodies splayed on the playground. (1) A lot of semi-automatic weapons can be converted to automatic with a file. (2) You don't like me using the word "idiotic", but you sure are naive if you don't think there are a lot of illegal automatic weapons out there. If you've got the money, you can get one. (3) It is not "illegal" to own an automatic weapon if you can legally gain one--it is legal to own one, albeit with restrictions, and after you have gone through the proper process . I never said it wasn't difficult; if you do have one registered, you have to produce it if the authorities demand to see it. I was not trying to "mislead others", as you say; nor did I "prove [my] lack of knowledge" because I knew what I was talking about. You're the one with the Pinocchio nose.

Feisty: I rest my case. I simply ask to open the door to debate and discussion and you refer back to name calling. But that is a typical liberal when they don't have a valid point or argument to make they refer to name calling.

But everyone in this thread already knows you do not have the ability to form a valid argument or debate your point because you don't have a point. You simply read from the Liberal playbook and when someone questions your logic and asks for you to expand on your comment or thought and you are unable to. Thus the name calling.

But everyone in this thread already knows you have nothing to add to the debate and is nothing new to them nor I.

Jack and Feisty:

It is truly too bad that Friday's shooter didn't meet up with a gun owner who knew how to shoot early in his rampage. I guarantee you things would have turned out differently.

Oh wait. He did meet up with a gun owner who knew how to shoot, right at the very start of his rampage, before a single child was killed.

He killed his first victim with her own gun.

If you are not prepared to admit that this incident is evidence that gun ownership is the problem and not the solution, you aren't seeing straight. You are perfectly well entitled to have your own opinions.

You are not entitled to have your own facts.

Jack:

You obviously did not read my post that was detailed in explaining how your information was incorrect but in a state of "genius" simply repeated the same incorrect information.

For those interested just look it up. Jack is GREAT at just typing info but also GREAT at not caring if it is accurate.

Don't take my word for it just look it up. And then YOU will also know that Jack doesn't have any idea about what he is talking about. The information he is stating is incorrect and any quick Google search or going to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to see the process to buy an automatic weapon. EXTREMELY difficult but Jack is trying to mislead you into thinking it is easy. It is not. And the Google search will confirm his other comments are without merit too. Just check it out and confirm that Jack knows nothing about what he is pretending to "know" as fact. It is not.

ProBusiness

Houston: Your argument is flawed to begin with. Of COURSE we had guns 30 years ago that had the fire power to kill 26 people back then. Nothing has changed in the types of guns, caliber of ammo, or quantity held in clips. That is an incorrect and flawed argument.

If you aren't bright enough to understand that weapons that can fire 50 rounds per minute have no use other than killing large numbers of people quickly and should be banned, then there's no hope for you.

RonB: What an ignorant comment. So if a teenager takes their mother's keys and takes their family car for a drive and crashes into a school bus then we should severely restrict car ownership? What a totally immature and irresponsible comment.

This event was not CAUSED because we don't have gun control. What it SOUNDS like you are referring to is NOT gun control but gun elimination. Are you suggesting these children might NOT have been killed if we had NO guns? Are you REALLY going to take that incredibly naive leap? Do you realize that the BIGGEST school massacre in the United States took place in 1921 called the Bath School disaster (look it up). Was it a "crazy" person with guns? No. He detonated a bomb and killed 44 people.

To think GUNS are the reason this massacre took place you are naive. So let's not focus on gun control - that was NOT the cause and NOT the solution. We need to better understand why mental illness is not better identified and how we can better protect the children.

To make comments like you did show no rational thought or idea was actually present and was just a naive comment.

Houston: Once again you missed the point. Gun ownership and types of guns have not changed in the last 30 years but these types of tragedies are happening more frequently. So the problem is not gun ownership because if that hasn't changed much that CAN'T be the cause. Something else is occurring.

Let's have an adult debate on what has CHANGED within society to identify a cause and not try to make UP a cause and make UP a solution that has no bearing in the issue.

More irrational nonsense from TM; a Rush Limbaugh dittohead.

We know where your language comes from, TM: "the party of tolerance:" Yes, that from the intolerant.

Let me be very clear with you. I do not give a flying fig what you think of me, of tolerance or anything else. You want to make excuses for gun carrying nuts, that we are "terrifying" them by holding them to account, and you expect me to take you seriously? BASTA!

The NRA has been dictating policy in this nation for far too long. Spare me your outrage about being told what to do. It is about time that someone did.

Get help. You need it.

Why this obvious cause and effect relationship escapes some people is hard to comprehend.

#1.153

Until we see exactly what video games this young man was playing, I am not prepared to discuss any form of restrictions on anyone's Constitutional rights.

No Greater Love.

There is no greater love than the love of a child for their parents and the love of a parent for their

child.

This is a given.

Yet...Columbine...Virginia Tech...Tuscon...Aurora...Clackamas...and now Newtown to name a tragic

few.

Because it was to soon to have the conversation at the first one, then came the next, after that the

next, and now we're here. Looking at the faces of 20 (twenty!!!) children mindlessly slaughtered by a

deranged maniac. This must be THE END!

The adult population of the United States is approximately 160 million.

Can even 4% show up in Washington to demand that the gun fetish of this country be regulated?

Four percent would be about 6.4 million people. Are there that many people who would turn out to

save one more child? Perhaps their child?

If we, as citizens of this nation, cannot get up and fill the mall of the Capitol and then overflow

the city to demand ACTION now, then perhaps this is the doom to which our sloth will relegate

us.

MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! LET YOUR PRESENCE BE KNOWN! MARCH ON D.C. ON FEB. 14, 2013!

Show your love.

P.S. If you haven't watched "Bowling for Columbine", you owe it to yourself for understanding's sake.

God, ProBusiness, and you wonder why I use the word "idiot" when referring to you and certain others.

I have seen a semi-automatic rifle converted to automatic with a file. Seen it. Understand?

When I say that you someone can get a hold of a fully automatic rifle if they have enough money, I am not talking about walking into a store and buying one. I'm talking about ILLEGAL fully automatic rifles. Understand yet?

I know people who have gone through the process of legally obtaining a fully automatic weapon and know that it is not an easy process. Understand?

And you know what? I still don't give a damn what you think. And you're still an idiot.

And what I can gather from your response to Ron B., you didn't read what he wrote. Unbelievable.

Pro-Business, you are distorting, diverting and distracting. Let me address your points in order.

1. Yes, cars can be used to kill. Please explain to me why that means that we should not have sensible restrictions on guns? You can't, because it doesn't.

2. Yes, people can generate lots of casualties without guns. Please explain to me why that means that we should not have sensible restrictions on guns? You can't, because it doesn't.

3. Yes, paying better attention to mental health issues will help, too. Please explain to me why that means that we should not have sensible restrictions on guns? You can't, because it doesn't.

Sorry about your silly little talking points, dude. It sure looks like you need some that actually make sense.

As Abraham Lincoln reportedly said, my friend, when you point a finger at someone else, you are pointing three at yourself.

ProBusiness

Houston: Once again you missed the point. Gun ownership and types of guns have not changed in the last 30 years but these types of tragedies are happening more frequently. So the problem is not gun ownership because if that hasn't changed much that CAN'T be the cause. Something else is occurring.

Yes, something else is occurring. Gun worship is the new religion of the far right. There is no reason to allow people to have assault rifles, and you're just dodging that fact. Sawed-off shotguns are already illegal. Should the ban on those be lifted, too, if the NRA says so? How about RPGs? How about fully-automatic machine guns?

And why should the mentally disturbed not be allowed to have this fire power? The 2nd Amendment says "the people's right to bear arms shall not be infringed." It doesn't say anything that excludes crazy people from bearing arms. The authors of the Constitution didn't go into details like that. Maybe they assumed their descendants would have enough brains to use common sense in applying the Constitution to later eras. It appears they were wrong about that.

Pro Business, you seem to be so busy being superior to the rest of us, you cannot allow that there are opinions different from yours. You are, in fact, changeing the meaning of words to suit YOUR intent.

While neither you nor I were sitting in the room with the founding fathers and so cannot difinitively state what they meant, we can certainly use the rights they guaranteed to us to interpret their words in our own way. We can certainly use our right to respectfully disagree and to let a majority opinion rule.

I disagree on the point of gun ownership remaining unchanged for 50 years. 50 years ago there were few assault weapons and ammmunition magazines in private hands. 50 years ago there were stricter laws regarding both ownership and use. 50 years ago people were not as suspicious of a duly elected government.

Since you have given few alternative steps in your responses, I don't feel I should be required to present alternatives. However, if you truly value your guns, then you will not mind them being subjected to the same types of regulation, supervision and requirement as your automobile. If you truly value your guns and your right to carry them you will not mind being subject to mental and health checks. If you truly value your guns, you will consent to buy them from a registered dealer and not a "gun show."

We have more violence today due to a combination of increased stress due to econimic pressures on individuals. When combined with the easy and unchecked availability of many types of weapons, automatic, semi-automatic, assault, whatever, this makes a volatile mix. The fact that guns are available to those far beyond hobbyists or collectors or even those individuals that feel they need to protect themselves from a situation, a person, a government or whatever only compounds the problem and intensifies the danger.

What we need to do, as a country, is address the social problems and the inequities. We need to pay more attention to education and child rearing and teaching right and wrong. We need to provide for more attention to health and mental health. We need to teach respect for each other.

Violence is glorified in this country, in the movies, in video games, in sport, in everyday encounters. We don't respect our elected representatives nor our appointed safeguards. That needs to change as well. That you can walk the streets with a weapon says a lot about you and about society. If you are so concerned about being unarmed in public, perhaps there is more to worry about than just guns. But, some of the onus to make that right is on you as well. This is not the wild west nor is it the 18th century. This is supposedly a civilized society. Your views seem, to me, to be saying otherwise.

If you cannot understand and accomodate the concerns of others, that is a real problem.

Ron B,

Owning the gun is not the problem. The problem was, the owner allowed their mentally unstable child to shoot and have access to the gun. The legal owner did not properly store their weapon and keep it locked and away from their child. The gun did not set itself in the hands of the shooter and pull its own trigger. The mother should have known better, and kept it out of his hands, period.

I have no issues with stricter requirements to purchase guns, more thorough checks, etc. But to ban all guns is only going to disarm law abiding citizens and will do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Criminals do not follow laws. Illegal drugs is a prime example. You can legislate all you want, but criminals will still find ways to bring them in and distrbute.

newdayDAWNING...RETURNED

More irrational nonsense from TM; a Rush Limbaugh dittohead.

We know where your language comes from, TM: "the party of tolerance:" Yes, that from the intolerant.

Let me be very clear with you. I do not give a flying fig what you think of me, of tolerance or anything else. You want to make excuses for gun carrying nuts, that we are "terrifying" them by holding them to account, and you expect me to take you seriously? BASTA!

The NRA has been dictating policy in this nation for far too long. Spare me your outrage about being told what to do. It is about time that someone did.

Get help. You need it.

There you go again, making more assumptions, you can't understand simple reading comprehension. Answer my question. I suppose you can't because all you know how to do is verbally assault and make false accusations when your liberal daily talking points don't spell out an answer for you. You are a liberal sheep. BAAAAAAAAAAH

Mass murder (defined as more than 4 murders in a 24 hour period) is nothing new. What has changed is motivation and technology. In the 19th century, the motivation was generally economic. The inequality of wealth was internalized. Failure to become rich was seen as failure on a personal level. Failure and the self-image of being a TOTAL failure is the common thread. That, and the projection (blame) for their personal deficiencies. By the depression, (1930-1940) we see murder suicides among small businessmen and farmers. Their "object of failure" was usually a bank or mortgage company. Being an armed guard, for these companies, was considered a death sentence. They were the first ones that a shooter would kill, as they went "postal". (A term coined in the 1980's due to the disgruntled mail worker mass murderers.)

What has changed? Obviously, reporting, for one! Papers would generally stay away from a "normal" murder-suicide because it was too common and depressing. When a neighbor would go over to a house, from which they hadn't heard from, in a while, they would find a note that said only, “All died. I had ruther be ded. Look in zellar.” (real note) These stories were not considered good print until the 1950's. And, yes, ever since there has been the phenomenon of copy-cats.

Secondly, the motivation has changed from mainly economic to perceived social injustice. Bullying, social awkwardness, etc... all the fault of some other people or organization (school maybe... failed love life, etc..)

Finally, the technology has made killing FAR more efficient, allowing for FAR more casualties. Why did this nut use the semi-auto? It had the fastest fire rate, even faster than the pistols. The cycle rate was as fast as he could pull the trigger. Yes, the other weapons had a larger caliber round, but the speed of fire allowed this jerk to "spray" bullets. Sadly, because the caliber was smaller, he used more rounds per victim.

TM-689440

Crazy Steve, it's not the teacher's responsibility to teach morals. The parents are the ones who teach their kids right from wrong. Your assessment is, in my opinion, part of the problem. People are spitting out kids and expecting someone else to raise them. When the parents relinquish control of their children and stuff like this happens, of course they're going to say "I just don't know why little Johnny lost control and shot innocent people".

Sorry, it's beliefs like yours that breaks down the social fabric. The point I was trying to make (which you missed) is that moral message that used to be attached to religion was removed by the same religionists when they rightfully lost their captive audience. Now, I won't disagree with you that it should be the parents responsibility to teach these values, but if they fail to do so, who deals with the results? The answer of course is we all do. And you're forgetting the main purpose for schools: to equip children with the skills and knowledge to function responsibly and successfully in our society. While parents should bear a huge part of this, when they fail should we, as a society, simply abandon these children to fend for themselves as adults and only offer punishment for that failing? That's a large part of what's wrong these days; too many say 'I'm not responsible for 'others' failings' while either trying to ignore the damage done to both the children and society as a whole, or attempt forcing the 'others' into their beliefs. It's just not working.

Boil most any religion down and strip away the superstition, intolerance and dogma, and a basic, easily secularized moral message emerges; treat others the way you wish to be treated. This should be taught early and often throughout the educational process, with expansion into how this affects all of life's choices. The religious and non-religious alike are free to teach their own beliefs in the privacy of their homes, churches, and meeting places and if they can't reconcile those beliefs with this basic message, that just illustrates the poverty of them. And this isn't a religion issue; it's a free speech issue and an attempt to suppress said speech and thought.

TM: I do not advocate banning all guns. In a perfect world, I would, just like, in a perfect world, I would ban all abortions.

It is not a perfect world, and as a pragmatist I disavow both bans. In particular with guns, such a ban would mean that only the government and criminals would have them, and that is moving in the wrong direction.

I have elsewhere proposed a practical solution that would tilt private gun ownership strongly toward law-abiding gun owners. What we need to do is ban the manufacture or import of civilian guns for a generation. But you can buy and sell your legal guns all you want.

At the end of a generation, the guns of criminals and irresponsible gun owners will tend to have been confiscated or to have malfunctioned through lack of proper care. Meanwhile, the guns of responsible gun owners will be as functional as ever.

Coupled with this, I would require that you pass two tests for gun ownership - one of them psychological.

And finally, mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns so that we can start finding them immediately. Failure to do so means you get the same sentence as the criminal who uses your gun in a crime.

None of these are perfect solutions. But that is no reason not to implement them because they will make a difference.

And by all means, ban assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. In fact, there is a petition on the white house website right now that needs your signature calling for exactly that.

Crazysteve. How is it my responsibility to teach your child right from wrong. In this day and age I don't want anything to do with others kids for fear of being sued or accused of some heinous crime. I saw a situation a couple of weeks ago while shopping where 2 young kids were acting up and being annoying in a store and the manager told the kids to stop it. The next thing you know the mom (a real winner in her own right) comes running around the corner screaming at the manager that he has no right to speak to her kids in that manner. He wasn't abusive or anything like that to them but he didn't even try to argue with the lady but instead kicked them out of the store. Then the lady stands out front screaming obscenities thru the door and of all things she called the police because she wanted to file a police report.

You know what, Backhouse-san, you phukin suck. Judging from the amount of comments I had to go through to make a reply tells me that I'm not the only one who thinks this, dude. So, maybe, you should find your center & have yourself a moment of clarity b/c obviously your frak chi be the off. Who in the frak goes political on a bunch of kids deaths? If any of these were your kids would you be thinking what you said was the koo? Scratch that, you screwed up enough you probably would. Well, it not, U& you screwed in the head thinking it is!

Crazy Steve,

I agree that a basic moral message, a sense of right and wrong should be instilled not only in school but everywhere. I've seen more than a few young people with a very self centered almost sociopath type attitude towards everything and everyone.

I'm not sure I read your post correctly, did you say that "religionists" removed moral teaching from schools? I'm not sure I understand how the church can dictate the curriculum a public school.

There you have it folks, a low information voter like TM trying to deflect from the real issue, since he has no ability to suss out what the real issue is.

Little words: Time for all good people to rush to the defense of their children and DEMAND that Congress act in defiance of the NRA thugs.

Now. Would one of you good people who have lots and lots of patience try to explain this to our little troll TM?

Thanks.

As much as we feel for the victims the problem is not the gun laws, it's our society as a whole. Case in point, Connecticut has some of the most restrictive guns laws in the US. That didn't stop this from happening because if people are determined to do something like this, they are going to ignore the law or render the laws ineffectual. This guy shot his mom and stole her guns. If it wasn't her, he would have killed somebody else and took their guns. If he couldn't find anybody else, this kid was smart enough to have improvised explosives and planted them at the school. The guns weren't the problem, the guy was.

I'm sure some (Feinstein) will call for banning "assault weapons", but assault weapons are nothing special. They are just stylized hunting rifles. Some will call for banning high capacity magazines ignoring the fact that low-capacity magazines and a little duct tape can serve the same exact purpose rendering that law completely useless. Or you could ban all guns in which case you would have Chicago...gun violence capital of the US where the bad guys apparently haven't got the word that their not supposed to have guns but law abiding private citizens are left defenseless.

While you're at it, you might as well outlaw smart, skinny, white boys between the ages of 17-25 who participate in role playing games or dabble in the goth culture. After all, on a percentage basis they are much more likely to be involved in something like this than any gun in the US.

davefromdanapointca

Crazysteve. How is it my responsibility to teach your child right from wrong

Unless you're a teacher, it's not your responsibility, or mine to teach yours. But if you are a teacher, then you have voluntarily taken on the responsibility of being one the people that child looks up to and accepted the task of trying to see that those children can succeed as adults.

Probusiness said:

Gun ownership and types of guns have not changed in the last 30 years but these types of tragedies are happening more frequently. So the problem is not gun ownership because if that hasn't changed much that CAN'T be the cause. Something else is occurring.

I would argue that it is gun ownership that is the problem--people being irresponsible about where they leave their weapons and who has access to them that shouldn't. While there are just as many guns now as there were before--it's the gun owner that isn't teaching the next generation about the responsibility that goes with the right. If you have a mentally ill/unstable individual in the house and that weapon is registered to you, then it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to make sure to secure your weapon. The last generation--our parents--were responsible about them--I never knew my Dad had a firearm until I was old enough to understand what one was for and what it did and Dad made sure to show me pictures of people shot in Vietnam (he was a Vietnam and Korean war vet) to impress on me what this was and what it could do and why I needed to handle it with care and respect and never EVER treat it as a toy, locked or unlocked, loaded or unloaded.

I'm volunteer at an animal shelter and this is an argument I have often;

There have been pit bull-type dogs for centuries now. Only recently within the last few decades has there become an epidemic of dog bite fatalities. So what's changed? Irresponsible ownership, people who don't secure them properly and aren't trained to handle them safely around others.

There have been guns for centuries now. Only recently in the last couple of decades has there become an epidemic of mass shootings. So what's changed? Irresponsible ownership, people who don't secure their weapons and aren't trained to handle them safely around others.

You really need to open your eyes and realize these tragedies are occurring more and more NOT because guns exist (they always have) but because we have lost our moral compass and children are no longer taught about God and the difference between right and wrong.

I beg to differ. Just because I don't teach my children about the Christian God does not, in any way, means that they don't know right from wrong.

The Westboro Baptist folks, who I understand are planning on picketing some of the CT child victims' funerals under the assumption that this is God's judgment on CT for legalizing same-sex marriage, teach their kids plenty about God, and, by your reasoning, the difference between right and wrong..and yet I would say that with this latest example, they have shown they are devoid of morals regarding respect for others, irregardless of their having learned about God.

It's what you do that matters, not whose Name you do it in.

Crazy Steve, it is still not the teacher's responsibility to raise the kids. It's not a voluntary acceptance of that task to teach them morals. If the parent fails to do so, then the state should remove the child from the home and the parents be forced to pay for placement in another home, where the child can receive the proper upbringing. It is not anyone's responsibility other than the parent. My feeling is not breaking the social fabric of the nation, if anything, allowing irresponsible parents to let their unruly children run wild and expect the teachers to teach kids right from wrong, IS breaking our social fabric. It used to not be this way BECAUSE parents knew they were responsible, and were allowed to discipline their children without fear of being jailed for spanking their kid when the kid needed it. It's just that simple.

Pistol Instructor

I'm not sure I read your post correctly, did you say that "religionists" removed moral teaching from schools? I'm not sure I understand how the church can dictate the curriculum a public school.

If you don't think religion can't dictate what's in schools, you need only look at the 'evolution vs creationism AKA intelligent design' nonsense going on. They object to 'secular morality' because it conflicts with whatever level of intolerance their beliefs contain and don't want their children exposed to competing ideas that they can't logically refute.

This 'secular' moral message does exist at a very low level, but they have fought expansion of it tooth and nail. One other problem is there's little teaching material available that contains this, as the textbook manufacturers are trying to appease the states where the religionists hold sway (such as Texas, the number 1 or 2 buyer of textbooks) and this will kill sales, not to mention whatever local school boards do.

Crazy Steve,

Guess I'm going to let this one go. I agree with you that a sense of morality needs to be instilled in our society especially our youth. They have such great access to sex, violence and immorality ( I went on tear about this in post #1.148) Where it has gone and why it's not present is a matter we could probably argue without resolution, pointlessly I might add. The real problem with this is how are you going to legislate morality? In the 70s and the 80s Larry Flint spent a lot of money and time beating the supreme court down over that very topic.

Ron B,

I'm so glad we can see eye to eye on that part. You understand that an outright "ban" simply wont do anything to help. I definitely have no problems with a mandatory psychology exam, paid for by the applicant and administered by a professional certified by the state (to eliminate fly by night "psychologists"). I think a more extensive background check SHOULD be done, and only people with squeaky clean records and no red flags should be able to purchase weapons.

I think you will find, that if you have an honest and reasonable idea and not spitting ignorant, hateful, blanket assessments like some of the posters here, we can agree in the middle. Most of us (gun owners) don't have a problem with tightening regulations. We do have a problem though when someone wants to penalize us because of the actions of a few. There are A LOT more responsible owners than irresponsible owners. None of us want to see this tragedy happen again, I assure you. I appreciate your peaceful and respectful ideas and discussion.

ForePlinger wrote:

"No Greater Love. There is no greater love than the love of a child for their parents and the love of a parent for their child. This is a given.

Yet...Columbine...Virginia Tech...Tuscon...Aurora...Clackamas...and now Newtown to name a tragic few.

Because it was to soon to have the conversation at the first one, then came the next, after that the next, and now we're here. Looking at the faces of 20 (twenty!!!) children mindlessly slaughtered by a deranged maniac. This must be THE END!

The adult population of the United States is approximately 160 million. Can even 4% show up in Washington to demand that the gun fetish of this country be regulated?

Four percent would be about 6.4 million people. Are there that many people who would turn out to save one more child? Perhaps their child?

If we, as citizens of this nation, cannot get up and fill the mall of the Capitol and then overflow the city to demand ACTION now, then perhaps this is the doom to which our sloth will relegate us.

MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! LET YOUR PRESENCE BE KNOWN! MARCH ON D.C. ON FEB. 14, 2013!

Show your love ...."

Yes, those who can should. And the many more of us who cannot march on Washington D.C. on that day, but can easily march on their own state Capitols that day, should do exactly that.

I will be standing before my state Capitol building in Salem that day. Our Legislative Assembly will be in session, and February 14 also happens to be the birthday of Oregon Statehood.

TM-689440

Crazy Steve, it is still not the teacher's responsibility to raise the kids. It's not a voluntary acceptance of that task to teach them morals. If the parent fails to do so, then the state should remove the child from the home and the parents be forced to pay for placement in another home, where the child can receive the proper upbringing. It is not anyone's responsibility other than the parent. My feeling is not breaking the social fabric of the nation, if anything, allowing irresponsible parents to let their unruly children run wild and expect the teachers to teach kids right from wrong, IS breaking our social fabric. It used to not be this way BECAUSE parents knew they were responsible, and were allowed to discipline their children without fear of being jailed for spanking their kid when the kid needed it. It's just that simple.

Where are you going to find these homes to place these kids? And what if the parents can't pay? Or should we just round them up and put them in camps? Who defines 'proper upbringing'? And who judges whether or not that parent is 'irresponsible'?

Teachers are many times among the very few adults children respect, including their parents. For some kids, school is the one safe place they have. So why not take advantage of that and include moral education along with the rest? Explain the harm from doing so?

Your ignorance is showing, sorry....

Pistol Instructor

Guess I'm going to let this one go. I agree with you that a sense of morality needs to be instilled in our society especially our youth. They have such great access to sex, violence and immorality ( I went on tear about this in post #1.148) Where it has gone and why it's not present is a matter we could probably argue without resolution, pointlessly I might add. The real problem with this is how are you going to legislate morality? In the 70s and the 80s Larry Flint spent a lot of money and time beating the supreme court down over that very topic.

I'm simply trying to point out a viable solution. Too many of all stripes are deflecting responsibilty for this onto 'others', whether it's parents, society, etc to protect their own narrow beliefs. And yes, trying to legislate morality is a losing proposition; while it may reduce the sheer volume, it also simply drives most of it underground and criminalizes what for some people is harmless behavior.

Look at it this way; the one thing nearly all children have in common is they attend school. The vast majority of them attend public schools, supported by our society. What's wrong with teaching a basic moral message in support of our society as part of that universal education? I have yet to hear a clear, logical explanation as to why that would be bad.

My ignorance is not showing, Steve. Come on now.

This is what needs to be discussed. What classifies negligence. How to handle this kind of situation. Parents have been allowed to diflect responsibility and that is a large part of the problem. They can throw their hands up and say "I don't know what to do" and expect someone else to pick up where they dropped the ball. It has become the norm now to blame someone else for their own lack of responsibility, and is where the "problem" originates. We used to be better off because people WERE held responsible, but they were also allowed to discipline their children. I'm not talking about beating them; honest discipline. Kids need to be taught consequences and they need to be held to them. Feelings will be hurt, it won't spoil the child. I can't recall how many times I was told no as a kid, and I don't feel any anguish or need to take it out on anyone. I understand REALITY, and that coddling kids and telling them it's ok when its not is doing more harm than anything.

TM-689440

My ignorance is not showing, Steve. Come on now.

You're explaining what's wrong, but your solution is simply more deflection to 'others'. Or are you honestly proposing a HUGE expansion of the foster care and child court system, which is already overburdened to the point of dysfunction? Who is to pay for this? And this ignores the fact that by the time this becomes needed for a childs' welfare, a lot of the damage has already been done. Not to mention the fact that most of these guilty parents are products of the same upbringing that they're inflicting on their children and don't have the skills or knowledge to change.

While the reasons for this mess are many, explain to me why teaching a set of basic moral principles in the public schools is bad without bringing up 'responsibilty' and who it belongs to, or bringing religion into it? This is the United States after all, is some 'unity' too much to ask?

For that matter, a parenting class should be mandatory too.

All of you 2nd Amendment zealots - please pay attention to what New Day posted above. Funny how you keep forgetting this part

"A well regulated militia".

Regarding Huckabee's comment that somehow removing prayer from schools is somehow the reason why this happened - didn't some deranged person kill a bunch of kids in an Amish school a couple of years ago? I am fairly sure they probably say their prayers in an Amish school.

Does your god really allow a deranged person to break in to a school and massacre 26 innocent people because they don't pray in school? This further confirms the reason I am not a christian.

Boy the clown car has really unloaded on here today and Caesar and mruseurhead are in the front seat. How could you possibly be against the ban on assault weapons? Even you two squirrels can't think these are ok to unleash on the public.

I don't really understand why people think "God in schools" would have an effect on the actions of a mentally ill shooter. Or premarital sex and other "values" the right touts. Honestly, I think these shooters have a lot of sexual, and other frustration that your family values crowd only fuels. No offense ProBusiness, but a guy who's getting laid regularly doesn't go out and become a deranged shooter. Doesn't happen:)

WIN/WIN solution: I'm a gun owner who really, really enjoys his weapons for target shooting-I don't even enjoy hunting and killing things, and I hate reloading, so high capacity magazines are great.

SO... Make me register my weapons and include who is living in my household, and how I am going to secure my weapons and ammunition. If anyone in my household has been diagnosed with mental illness, my plan on file needs to include how my weapon will be safe from them. If I become mentally ill, get, say 2 offenses of any sort related to alcohol, etc, I must surrender my weapons to the care of someone mentally fit until a Dr gives me a clean bill of health plus 1 year or something like that.

All these provisions would be enforced with criminal liability should anything happen with the weapons due to my carelessness. I don't mind giving up my info to the state, I'm not paranoid. I think this safer than just regulating weapons, because a mentally unfit person is too dangerous to own any gun of any type, and those of us who are responsible and not paranoid survivalists don't mind being accountable.

No offense ProBusiness, but a guy who's getting laid regularly doesn't go out and become a deranged shooter. Doesn't happen:)\

LOL. Thanks for your rational thoughts. It's refreshing to hear them from a gun owner. I come from a large family and had a bachelor uncle who was one of the greatest guys you'd ever meet--everybody in the family loved him, he was a surrogate father to some of my younger cousins.

He was also a "gun nut", as he put it. He collected guns and would bring them out all the time to show whoever would listen. He was extremely safety conscious. Even when I was a little kid he wouldn't let me point a plastic pistol at someone.

But he bought into the whole rabid NRA "they're going to take our guns away" business. That was always hard for me to take because he couldn't talk about it without getting incredibly angry. But as I say, he was a very sweet, caring man, and that one shortcoming didn't make us love him any less. May he rest in peace.

KimH,

Boy the clown car has really unloaded on here today and Caesar and mruseurhead are in the front seat. How could you possibly be against the ban on assault weapons? Even you two squirrels can't think these are ok to unleash on the public.

Agreed.

Probusiness and all... In the early 1970's, maybe the late 1960's there was a sniper in the bell tower at the University of Texas who shot a number of people. I don't remember how many were killed and wounded. The sniper had a clear field of view and because he locked the door, it took some time for the authorities to get to him. He shot 15 or twenty people. Apparently he had a brain tumor, or something akin to that. This mass public shooting caused an uproar. The access to the bell tower was closed a full decade later, and still might be closed for all I know. In those days the concern was protecting the public from such mayhem.

The war in Viet Nam was going on, and these "bank robbers" in New Orleans robbed a bank, I believe took some hostages, and one of the bank robbers with a high power rifle took up position on a building across the street. ( This was on national TV news. ) Remembering the Austin, Texas mass shootings, and concerned with the lookout shooter, the authorities called in an Army helicopter gunship, as was being used in Viet Nam. The helicopter gunship shot the roof shooter... in fact the shooters rifle was shot to pieces. There were so many shots expended by the gunship, that any damage the bank robbers could have done was minuscule in comparison. Thus the use of military counter assaults was banned. Then we go forward in history to the two brothers who were bank robbers in California who had the cops out gunned, and the cops had to go into a gun shop to get armed. Many were shot in that incident too. This all falls into your 30, 40 years ago category there was no equivalent violence years ago. There would be TV news video of these incidents.

Jack in Portsmouth and Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

The principal made a great effort to help and am sorry she was not successful. How ever a 1911 45 can hold its own against any semi auto rifle. A 100 yard shot is not hard to make with practice and training. Most likely the shooting would be less than 50 feet. Not much chance of not hitting what you are shooting at. The shooter just has to place one good round in the kill zone. If a gun or two were in locked boxes at school, they would be as safe as not being there. The only ones that would have access to them, would be the people that were trained to use them and had passed a testing program. I think most parents would approve of this type measure. If you think the police will save you, just look at the time it took them to arrive at the school. Where I live it is 20 min to an hour.

Staff members were there in seconds, unarmed and useless.

this thread is wacko on both sides of the issue...

- the anti gun crowd are killing their own message by saying crazy stuff that is nonsensical like assault weapons are so much more powerful than other guns, that they are fully automatic, that they have armor piercing ammunition, that semi auto is faster than a pistol, or that someone with a handgun would have no chance...... all of those things are entirely false and you guys sound silly

- the pro gun crowd sounds equally crazy quoting the militia clause, saying that we should be arming teachers and a long list of other stuff I'm too tired to remember

the anti gun crowd is on the offensive for this issue.... your goal should be reduction of gun violence.... we gun owners, 47% of Americans, share that goal...

when you guys say completely illogical stuff that's been proven ineffective like: ban all assault weapons and large magazines..... you lose us because you are infringing on our rights, assault weapons are simply an appearance thing and are not more dangerous than other rifle types, and large magazines are inconsequential because reload times are so low...

the issues are about violence in our culture, a medical system that is failing us on mental health, political will to provide a real solution that isn't silly like the assault weapons ban, background checks that are truly comprehensive... things like that...

if you guys keep squawking like ninnies about wanting to ban assault weapons... Congress will throw you that bone to get you off their back....

then next year some 21 year old kid who was acting crazy but couldn't get help because his insurance doesn't pay for more than $200 of mental health per year and ducked backgound checks because his medical records weren't included because it isn't required by law, will put twenty 10 round handgun magazines in a backpack with a handgun... go to a school.... and kill 50 other kids.....

and it will be on you anti gun people....

because you didn't look at the real problems when you had some political clout to do something.... and you let Congress get rid of the hot potato by feeding you the cheap... useless.... moronic... assault weapons and large magazine ban... because that's the only catchphrase you know and you don't really know the issues

@ Backhouse

Conceivably the worst massacre in our national history - and not a single Republican deigned to appear on Sunday television (Meet The Press). What a cowardly response.

The killer fired dozens of high-velocity rounds, using a military-style semioautomatic Bushmaster rifle.

Evidently you don't know much history;

The OKC Bombing 168 dead including 19 children under the age of 6. Not a single firearm was used.

The Bath School Bombing 1927, which killed 38 children age 7-14, two teachers, and four other adults; at least 58 people were injured. A Winchester Rifle was found at the scene, but was not used.

Up until 1934, any one in the US could order and have shipped through the USPS, a fully automatic sub-machine(Tommy Gun) or even a BAR. Where were all the spree shootings then(other than criminal gangland)?

I am not sure if Dynamite was part of the 1934 National Firearms Act or not, as I have heard unverified stories of farmers in Arkansas and else where buying dynamite at the local hardware store up until the mid 60's. (If anyone has any info on the regulation of explosives, please let me know)

If easy access to deadly weapons is the measure of a deadly society, why were things like the "Bath School Disaster" not regular occurrences?

NO, the only thing that has changed in the last 50 or so years is the Secular Progressive agenda has wove its tentacles into society. Family is irrelevant. Dads are irrelevant. Males, especially white males, are irrelevant or even 'need' to be marginalized. Morals and Personal Responsibility are irrelevant. History is irrelevant.

My point is, since the 60's and the Progressive march toward hedonism in this country, with the rise of the welfare state, and easy divorce, discipline in this country is gone. No longer are men being raised by fathers. And how do you become a real man, if you don't have one to show you the way? Granted it isn't always successful, but it is more successful than the alternative.

As far back as the Whiskey Rebellion, the government has used Federal Militia, later the National Guard to "restore" order. And as recently as the '70's, there have been several clashes between the National Guard and civilians, especially during labor disputes, but other protests as well, witness Kent State and Mississippi. It is definitely not unheard of for the Government to use military forces to impose its will upon the populace. Thus far, it has been, relatively supported by the majority, but what about the day it isn't?

You people scream about the "Wealthy Elite" and how they manipulate politics. Who is going to oppose them when they take over? Oh it is all fine and dandy now, they are doing what you want. If the irrelevant history shows anything, change is inevitable.

@ Houston #1.153

Probusiness

Gun ownership is a non-factor. We DIDN'T have mass tragedy and massacres 50, 40 , or even 30 years ago when gun ownership, as a percentage of population, was actually higher.

What we didn't have back then was easy access to weapons with enough fire power to kill 26 people in a matter of a few minutes. Why this obvious cause and effect relationship escapes some people is hard to comprehend.

Evidently you don't know history very well either; read the above post.

@ post #1.220

Oh it is all fine and dandy now, they are doing what you want.

Correction, You are doing exactly what THEY want...

A moment of silence for OUR little angels of Newtown, Connecticut...

Words are powerless.

Thanks, Feisty.

People are dead, I don't care what you think. I'm not going to debate these opinions, period. Children are most of the dead, and most of the others are people who were trying to protect the kids.

Those people trying to protect the kids were the most useless people on the face of the planet according to some people, folks who are nothing but leeches who are a drain on society...public employees. Employees who in most cases are making THOUSANDS less than they could with the same level of education in the private sector. They aren't doing it for money, they do it as a calling. They DELIBERATELY gave their lives to protect the young lives they were trying to develop. They are NOT leeches, theirs is among the most sacred duties of our society. Don't try to debate this point, I don't care what you think.

This isn't about security at school buildings. This guy BROKE OUT A WINDOW to get inside. In any case we had 3 highly public shootings in 4 days. Don't minimize that, I don't care what you think.

Don't tell me more people walking around armed is the solution. If you think that you're listening to too many propaganda pieces and not thinking enough about the REAL statistics of gun ownership or what's likely to happen with multiple people shooting it out around innocents. I won't even address this ridiculous "solution" that comes mostly from the "need" of weapons makers to maximize their profits by keeping us all afraid in order to generate more customers. I don't care what you think.

Yeah, you have Second Amendment rights. So do I, so do all the hunters and skeet shooters I know here and in my home town, including my Father and brother. I'm glad they enjoy their firearms in a responsible way and they're welcome to do so. Those Second Amendment rights are as unlimited and all encompassing as your First Amendment rights to yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater or practice human sacrifice as part of your religion. The Second Amendment is as subject to reasonable restrictions as any of our other constitutional rights...particularly when your rights infringe on my right to not be killed by random gun violence. If you think otherwise I don't care what you think.

About the only thing we're left with here is the supposition that "you can't predict the actions of some random crazy." No, but we live in a society in which profit motive makes it virtually impossible to get good mental health care through private insurance and "fiscal responsibility" makes it virtually impossible for people who are desperate to get good mental health care to do so in the public sphere. I could care less if you want to argue that point...I don't care what you think.

So it isn't true that "this isn't the time to debate this issue." It's PAST TIME to debate this issue. I don't pretend to know all the answers, but I know this;

Guns don't make people violent, but they make violent people more effective.

Guns don't make people violent, but they make violent people more effective.

Speed Kills

What’s the lesson of the Connecticut school massacre? The faster the weapon, the higher the body count.

By William Saletan

This morning, a madman attacked more than 20 children at an elementary school in China. As of this writing, there are no reported fatalities.

A few hours later, a madman attacked an elementary school in Connecticut. As of this writing, 20 of those kids are dead.

The difference? The weapon. The madman in China had a knife. The madman in Connecticut, according to police, had a semi-automatic assault rifle, two semi-automatic handguns, and multiple 30-round magazines.*

Look up the worst school massacres in history, and you’ll see the pattern. Madmen are everywhere. They strike without regard to gun laws, mental health care, or the national rate of churchgoing. They’ve slaughtered children in every country you’d think might have been spared: Scotland, Germany, Canada, Brazil, Finland, Japan. They’ve falsified every pet political theory about what kind of culture or medical system or firearms legislation prevents mass murder.

But one pattern holds true: The faster the weapon, the higher the body count. It’s not politics. It’s logistics. If you stick a knife in your first victim, it takes time to move on to your second. You might need two stabs or more to finish off the first kid. By then, the other kids have begun to flee. Soon, the cops will be here. How much time do you have? At some point, it’s time to off yourself. And all you managed to kill were two lousy kids because the only weapon you had was a kitchen knife.

Google “knife control” and you’ll find legions of gun-control skeptics comparing U.S. firearm attacks to Chinese knife attacks. In the past two years, there’s been an epidemic of knife attacks on Chinese schools. Some of them show up on Wikipedia’s list of school massacres. But none crack the top 10 because the body counts never rise above single digits. It’s just too hard to kill that many people, even little kids, with a knife.

Guns do more damage. Look down the list and you’ll see gun after gun after gun. But not all guns are equal. I’ve gone through the 25 worst massacres on the chart, and nearly every shooter had a semi-automatic weapon. The one exception was a guy who had speedloaders and a bandolier so he could keep firing. High-capacity magazines are another common factor. All these patterns converge on a common lesson: Speed kills. Madness pulls the trigger, but the rate of fire drives the body count.

It’s not all about guns, either. The worst Chinese school massacre by a knife-wielding madman wasn’t caused by the knife. The perpetrator used the knife to scare the kids and make them retreat to the back of a classroom. Then he locked them inside and killed them by starting a fire. Right below him on the list is a guy in Germany who killed one victim with a lance and the rest with a flamethrower that ignited a classroom. Knives and lances take too long. It’s more efficient to kill everyone at once. That’s what the record-holder did: He wiped out more than 40 victims with a series of bombs.

I wish we could pass a magic law that would stop madmen from killing our children. We can’t. There will always be angry lunatics. There will always be knives and shotguns and gasoline. I don’t think banning guns will make the problem go away. We don’t need another all-or-nothing war between pro-gun and anti-gun ideologues. What we need is a frank, precise, constructive conversation about the problem of high-speed weapons. You don’t need rapid-fire weapons to hunt or defend your home. Cops don’t need them to shoot down bad guys. And while it’s true that passing a law against them won’t eliminate them, that’s not an argument against legislation. It’s an argument for going beyond legislation. The community of gun sellers and enthusiasts must act collectively to track and control the technology of mass murder.

Every child who died in that school in Connecticut today was precious. To lose even one young life in such a senseless way is a gut-wrenching tragedy. But this I know: It didn’t have to be 20.

www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/human_nature/2012/12/connecticut_school_shooting_semi_automatic_weapons_and_other_high_speed.html

John B, excellent post. DaNoid, you, too.

John,

..."The "need" of weapons makers to maximize their profits by keeping us all afraid in order to generate more customers."

One of your points highlights how the Bushmaster Lanza used, was not America's grandfather's firearm. The damage that came out of the end of Lanaza's rifle was indescribable.

And get a load of this: The group that makes this weapon, said their weapons were "environmentally sound" and they were not going to change their "moral" stance. The word 'deluded' is inadequate.

And get a load of this: The (Freedom) Group that makes this weapon, said their weapons were "environmentally sound" and they were not going to change their "moral" stance.

In order to change their "moral stance" they'd have to have morals to begin with....

Good points. This Killer snuffed the lights of approximately 3 victims per minute, reportedly with multiple rounds to each one.

The Bushmaster made this violent person remarkably effective.

Bravo, John B and DaNoid.

I understand the "slippery slope" argument that the NRA makes but surely we can all agree that ordinary citizens don't need assault weapons. And to their argument that criminals will still have them I would say that criminals aren't the ones that go out and shoot innocent school children and their teachers.

Thanks for the posts Da Noid,

"But one pattern holds true: The faster the weapon, the higher the body count. It's not politics. It's logistics".

The Bushmaster semiautomiatic shouldn't have been in the home of Lanza's mother.

The Europeans must be shaking their heads at all of us in America.

How many more have got to die,.....and why do you need a flash suppressor, teflon bullets and a 45-round magazine to hunt deer??

If you need THAT many rounds to hit a deer,....then maybe shooting ISN'T your thing.

Joe Scarborough and Joe Manchin, both Republicans, are changing their views on assault weapons bans and many other reforms.

Nobody ever died before guns where invented! :O WE MUST REMOVE ASSAULT WEAPONS AT ONCE, because a killer won't do it if he can't get his hands on one... No he'll let it go...

This is exactly what the plea sounds like and its absurd and neglects the very same issues that led to this tragedy. A disturbed boy was neglected and slipped through the cracks of society. Better mental help needs to be available and evaluations shouldn't lead to the slipping of kids through said cracks...

If Switzerland's population holds all assault rifles and ammunition at home and maintains one of the lowest crime rates in the world then the issue lies not with the kind of weaponry...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/

Look at the graph. There is a huge spike in gun violence from these weapons.

The murder rate in the UK and Australia is 4 times lower per capital than the US and they banned guns.

Steeler Fan-380417...no, the NRA would not agree to banning assault weapons, armor piercing rounds, high capacity magazines, body armor for civilians, 50 Caliber weapons ( have you ever see the power of a 50 Cal round it was never intended for use against human targets, but NRA loves it ) etc. NRA has mixed their obsession with all guns of all types with kind of a religion about guns. The mixture of religion and guns attracts the crazies to their ranks. They now own a large portion of Congress and are our own Taliban !

The crazies are in government and that's what the Assault rifles are intended to keep in check. Our government. The freedoms lost in the last 10 years are insane. And the whole of communism couldn't hold a candle to it.

The crazies are in government and that's what the Assault rifles are intended to keep in check. Our government. The freedoms lost in the last 10 years are insane. And the whole of communism couldn't hold a candle to it.

Rest assured, the mind control rays beamed from the black helicopters can't penetrate your tinfoil hat, so you should be just fine...

If you choose not to own or carry a gun for self protection, that is your right, but I coose to and I'll be damned if I am going to let anybody impose their right not to carry and take this human rght of self preservation away from me.

@DrowningGrover

What tinfoil hat buddy? I didn't claim aliens exist or that the government uses mindcontrol... I claimed the most reasonable thing any democrat nation can and that is that their government isn't honest nor would it ever be.

How do you keep that from slipping, you pay attention. NDA Act of 2012 and the Patriot Act sure say a lot about that.

Less cynical comments and more educated responses.

A number of posts somehow or another manage to blame this on "the libs.' Even taking into acccount the mindlesss reflex that goes into a post like thatThis is discouraging because if that's what these geniuses reallly take from this then there is no hope whatever of arrriving a t a satisfactory arrangement. ALl you freeedom loving idiots aren't doing anything but reserving a slab for yourself with your popgun armaments in case of a real government crackdown -= not the imaginary one you all fear.. If the government wants your guns they will have them and thgere is nothing you will be able to do about it. THey have bigger and bettter guns and are more trained on them than you cowboys with a .22 Unlesss you fancy yourslef assasins, of course. Fat chance.

You can't disarm the population, 80 million have guns. The amount of manpower and resources alone ontop of the incidents in defense of maintaining those weapons would amount to civil war. So yes there is a lot you can do about it.

@ All you....

Don't you understand that these 20 kids were in a small bathroom?? It didn't matter WHAT the friggin' nut used... If he had one gun with one clip or 20 single shot pistols... these kids would have been dead either way... It's the friggin NUTS that we need to keep track of!!

And perhaps when liberals will stop murdering kids before they are born, then the conservatives will be willing to restrict guns so to stop murdering kids AFTER they are born...

More social care is necessary because if a nut in china can do it with a knife then a nut here will do it with a paper plane regardless of what we ban the use of -_-

NO ONE DIED IN THE CHINESE KNIFE ATTACK. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57559179/china-school-knife-attack-leaves-23-injured/

And that's the point you purposely fail to get. Guns don't make people violent, but they make violent people more effective. They made Adam Lanza infinitely more effective than the attacker in China.

@ Eric #2.13

Look at the graph. There is a huge spike in gun violence from these weapons.

The murder rate in the UK and Australia is 4 times lower per capital than the US and they banned guns.

Does your graph take into account overall crime rates, which are up post gun bans. (A friend is currently visiting from the UK, and while he doesn't have numbers, he says it is crazy in some places. Guys just barge into a house, with a club or what ever, take what they can and leave, and they don't get into a big hurry) Yup, that handgun control thing is working great.

they are rethinking the handgun ban btw.

John B posts, "And that's the point you purposely fail to get." Exactly right! that's the diffference betweeen being ignorant and willfullly ignorant. THey've fixed on a position and are stuck with it. THese non-thinkers have to take offf the blinders and actuallly processs some reality or that army of moslem spider monkeys that President Obama has beeen training will swoop down their chimneys on CHristmas Eve and steal ALL their weapons.

There should be better rules of the game - new & better gun laws can help. Better parenting can help too.

JoAnne in PA

There is a petition to White house to legislate gun control.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/273069-white-house-gun-control-petition-gets-immediate-support-online

JoAnne, excellent post. Those are the questions we should all be asking; those are the questions we should demand our legislators ponder as well.

JoAnne, great post.

NOW is a tipping point. This obscene tragedy has pushed folks very, very far.

Don't buy into the messages of indifference on this topic.

We need to do something this time.

Don't settle for the status quo.

Better mental help, constant re-evaluation and less neglect of those in need of mental help. As for guns, stricter more frequent re-evaluation would help.

Please, pray tell. What more do you think we should do. Even if there is a ban on certain types of weapons, there are still plenty of them on the street for years to come. So, other than complete confiscation (which will never happen), the only thing the government can do is impose these "feel good" empty laws

chuck- there's no instant solutions - I'd like to think we were moving in the right direcdtion, though.

IR, wonderful quote; thank you.

Independent R - "it tolls for thee".

We forget that we will die someday - it seems so far off. But these little children were just getting on their feet.

For the record, I am not anti-gun. Many in my family owned guns for hunting, one uncle collected a few rifles; kept them locked in a gun safe. Most gun owners and collectors are responsible individuals. However, I am opposed to concealed weapons permits without justification but just because...; opposed to allowing guns anywhere and everywhere; and yes, I am opposed to assault weapons. I doubt our founding fathers envisioned the equivalent of a machine gun, which did not exist in the 18th century, in the hands of the general public as part of the well-armed militia.

I also believe it is time to tell the NRA leadership to stuff it because the leadership are merely the puppets of gun and ammunition manufacturers whose sole purpose is to sell as many guns and as much ammunition as possible. Time for our legislators to stand tall and act on the will of the people, including 74% of NRA members.

I wonder how we can improve parenting, considering that Nancy Lanza failed in raising a good kid in Adam. Is parenting a family responsibility only? Or..... It takes a village? ...to borrow from Hillary.

I doubt our founding fathers envisioned the equivalent of a machine gun, which did not exist in the 18th century, in the hands of the general public as part of the well-armed militia.

So true Jody.

The acts of violence continues......

There was the 2006 Lancaster County, PA mass Amish school shooting where 11 little girls were shot, 5 killed and 1 later died from wounds.....the weapon of choice was a 9 millimeter semi.

Many of these loose guns would be useless if people that possess them could not get the ammunition.

Gun control is not the real solution to the tragic acts of violence that we see increasing in our land. Gun violence is a symptom of a far worse sickness that is infecting us as a people. We live in a society that has determined that there should be no such thing as absolute truth. We have elevated a philosophy that everyone can do what is right in their own eyes and things will continue to be just fine, and even get better. We have duped ourselves into thinking that the God of the Bible is no longer needed for us to function successfully as a society. We have pushed Him out of our schools, out of our government, out of our stores, out of our public squares, out of our press, out of our marriages and out of our families. We have even pushed Him out of some of our churches. We have set ourselves on a mission to silence the voice of the God of the Bible as we pursue our pleasures and vain pursuits of life. Our entertainment industry is now driven by sexual immorality and violence and we flock to watch it. We rapidly have been losing sight of what a healthy family should look like and we now even exalt, as noble, twisted definitions of what a family is. While shocked by the loss of these precious young school children this past week, we think little about the 3,000,000 innocent children whose lives we passively allow to be snuffed out by our abortion industry every year. Since 1973, we now are missing 1/8 of our nation’s population, yet we shamelessly push forward in now, even using tax dollars to take more innocent one’s lives. As a nation, we have the blood of innocent ones on our hands!

No, gun control is not the answer to cure our woes, America. We must end our hostility toward the only One who has the answer for us. It is time to turn back to Him and His truth.

Jody---two great posts; pitch perfect as usual.

I too am not against guns---we own them and enjoy recreational activities with them. The other "slippery slope" argument is that criminals will still get them. Maybe so---we could work on that too, but what is wrong with making it harder for people to engage in random violence.

Jody - "Columbine, Virginia Tech, Northern Illinois University, Tucson, Clackamas, Seattle, Tulsa, Seal Beach, Carson City, Manchester, Binghamton, Carthage, Kirkwood, Omaha, Salt Lake City, Oak Creek, Aurora, Portland.........."

One of the hardest things when someone dies has got to be about what words were last exchanged. Many parents will be thinking back about how many hugs, kisses...

Children are not small adults. They don't think like adults. Have lost the wherewithal to end this thought...

We must end our hostility toward the only One who has the answer for us. It is time to turn back to Him and His truth.

Thank you Mike Huckabee. How many people died at the hands of the Crusaders, or the Conquistadors, or the Inquisitors, or the Witch Trials? How about some real solutions?

On the flip side Jody, did the Founding Fathers envision the advent of the internet and Facebook in regards to the 1st Amendment? We can't always predict what someone was expecting to see at the time 200 years into the future. Right now we can't determine what the future will look like. Should we ask ourselves are we addressing the root of the problem, if we can identify it? Is it violence in the media? A lack of available and effective mental health services? Bad parenting? The fact that mankind has always used violence? Do we regulate alcohol or prescription drug use among registered firearms owners? How do we stop these incidents without doing away with rights that were given to us as citizens?

Chris, we remove our shoes at airports because of one shoe-bomber yet thousands die every year due to gun violence and we toss that up to "rights that were given to us as citizens." I have a right to go to the local store without wondering IF the person walking toward me has a concealed weapon. The rights of gun owners should not trump the rights of the rest of us.

Can we not agree to require background checks and waiting periods to buy firearms? Can we not agree to close gun show loopholes? Can we not agree that concealed weapons permits should be limited and justified? Can we not agree that everybody and his brother shouldn't be walking around "packing heat"? Can we not agree that allowing guns on college campuses and other public places is a step too far? I do not claim that such gun law restrictions will eliminate violence but as a citizen who also has rights beyond owning a gun, this country has a responsibility to make

Jody - One attempted shoe bomber...

Wow, you are so right, I never thought about it that way. Funny that no one thought it unreasonable to remove shoes on every flight, but closing the gun show loophole when selling guns is somehow infringing their rights. Making them pass background checks is infringing their rights. Making it more restrictive to limit the heavy magazine round will be infringing on their rights.

I believe in the 2nd amendment. If you want to have a gun for home protection that is your right. If you want to claim some cultural relevance/heritage crap about blasting an animal's brains out to get your manhood rigid go for it. You can choose to have your weapon, holster it, oil it up whatever. (Sorry but that is the way I feel). As for me it is my right to choose to never have a gun. It is also my right to insist that my government "for the benefit of the public" implement safe, secure legislation to regulate your weapons.

While passing gun control measures will not be a foolproof way to stop the gun toting fools who do these heinous acts, it can make a difference. If legislation could stop just one sicko and stop one massacre isn't it worth it? In addition, funding for mental health to get these people off the streets and cared for is almost as important.

To the others who see this only as a causal effect of a detiorating society (absence of family structure, asbsence of God from the public), you are missing an equally important societal change. Would you agree that society has changed such that a murderous weapon morphs into a sexy, powerful, status symbol by way of the media outlets and the NRA?

Our "post Christian" nation has killed multiple times more innocent unborn babies than all the Crusaders, Conquistadors, Inquisitors and witch hunters ever did. That goes for all of the American lives lost in all the wars we have fought as well. There could be another 2,500 Afghan wars like we have had and it would still not equal the lives lost to abortion since 1973.

Also, why do people think that these Crusaders and alike were really Christians? They were as fake as the those who sit in the church pews today, who really don't believe the Bible is the true inspired word of God or that Jesus is who he said he was, and who don't live the way of love that He has empowered true believers in Him to walk in. The problem is not on God's part, it is in our own unbelief and disobedience. The "Church" in America has more guilt than secular society in general, due to its unfaithfulness to the One they say they follow.

Agreed...we are powerless...we are a-noid.

All 435 house members are up for re-election in only 2 years, and the powerful NRA will put enough fear in some house members who are genuinely afraid and will be reluctant to do the right thing. The memories of such Newtown tragedy will fade, but the power of NRA is ever present.

The NRA is worse than Grover Norquist, who at least limits himself to intimidating Republican politicians. Sadly, the NRA is bi-partisan. Once again the 1% (in this case, the businesses who make and sell guns and bullets) have a segment of the population convinced to act in a way that is against all of our self-interest in the name of rights.

P,

"The memories of such Newtown tragedy will fade, but the power of NRA is ever present."

With all due respect, I don't subscribe to that view.

Da Noid: If our legislators to not act now. The sadness will abate and nothing will be done.

Backhouse: I hope you are correct.

Backhouse @#6.3

I don't want to see that people have short memories and fail to learn something from this tragedy, but unfortunately sometimes they do. And sometimes....

P,

The monstrously unthinkable has happened. Now it's up to us to raise our Voices.

And take Action.

I like Redhead Fisty's suggested solution. Oops, never mind, the bimbo only hurled insults, as usual. And mindless liberal left wingers voted for it. Yall are sadly pathetic. But wait a bit, Obama will tell you what to think soon.

@kenva...

Why do so many people say that Feisty 'can't understand normal thinking so much? Because all she can do is to call names... so why not just call a spade a spade.

I've read now from dopes that converting a semi-auto into fully with a file is easy... Well if you want to file the sear down, sure... Pull the trigger and all your shots are gone in 2.3 second. Some use that will be... I've also ready by other dopes that the guy had a fully automatic weapon.. and then others saying that you can shoot 50 rounds in 60 seconds... wow.. that's real accurate... anyone who shoots has tried that one with their semi-auto.. you hold it at your hips and strum the trigger like a guitar... trouble is your not hitting anything.. Gun control is just a word... libbies want total gun bans, but want their drugs. They say that we, gun owners have blood on our hands... Look at all the blood on theirs with 50,000 plus dead in Mexico because they want to get high.. look at much, much more blood on their hands because of all the unwanted children (ooops... lets make it a nicer image)... fetuses... Me personally, it doesn't matter which side of the pussy it's on to make a difference in killing it. But they want their rights eh? I see so many people hate the NRA... yet they ARE for instant background checks and to make mentally ill people blocked from getting access to firearms... it's all the extra add-ons on these laws that the lawmakers try to tack on... most people don't want to follow up, they just love their libbie soundbites...

Well anyway, I do think that people owning firearms should keep them locked up and away from children and the mentally ill. I do think there's too much violence in the movies ( Hollywood... liberal?? they don't practice what they preach)... and have any of you who want gun control ever actually seen the latest, unlocked versions of violent video games they produce??? Nawww, that has nothing to do with society... dopes.

BCWC,

And the funreals will start today, the grief and sadness will flow through through the streets in Newtown. The support, comfort and care will be given by the hands and hearts of family members, friends , neighbors, and fellow citizens.

All this , one week before Christmas, when we celebrate the coming of the "Prince of Peace".

The compex problem of violence should not deter citizens of good will from coming together to find a politcal and social common sense steps to reduce these senseless deaths.

BCWC, once upon a time I visited your country. (actually have been there quite a lot because of job). I came across an issue of the Toronto Star. It happened to be the issue with the crime statistic's for that year and I was astonished. Just one country north of us and it is amazing the difference in culture and yet we are in many ways the same. That particular year, and it was late Nov, or early Dec. as I remember, there had been only 5 murders in Toronto, most was not done by gun if I remember correctly. My point is those that do not believe that gun control works need to do a little honest research into countries such as yours to see how they have been lied too, through cleaver sayings and fear mongering the NRA has managed to stave off reasonable gun laws. In my opinion the NRA should be declared a terrorist organization and banned from the U.S. of A.

As a side note I learned that calling a Canadian a frog was equivalent to calling an American a dog. Interesting English speaking fellow, I met in Montreal. Clinton was president then and we talked about his problems and achievements. It was very informative and interesting to get a "foreign" perspective. ( = ;

John,

Although it is true that we have less gun violence, unfortunately we have had our own mass shootings. Dawson College in 2006. 2 including the shooter dead and 19 injured. In 1989 at the Ecole Polytecnique, a shooter killed fourteen women and injured ten other women and four men in just under twenty minutes before turning the gun on himself. In 1992 a deranged professor shot and killed 4 colleagues at Concordia University.

BCWC, terrific post. At least your country has far fewer. I heard an expert say that the USA averages 20 mass shootings per year. We can never prevent all violence but in the US, we need to at least make it harder.

BCWC, you mentioned two in 24 years, we have had more instances then that in the last week. BCWC, I think Canada is far ahead of the U.S., in many ways, your country is much safer then ours. Your health care system while not perfect is better, I find the people much friendlier and helpful. I drove a Semi, in Toronto if I turned my signal on to change lanes, people would move over and make room for me. In Chicago if I tried that I would be running over somebody because they won't give an inch. Courtesy is abundant in Canada.

We can never prevent all violence but in the US, we need to at least make it harder.

Agreed, Jody. Gun control, or magazine control, or whatever steps make sense, will help. But we also have to start acknowledging, recognizing and treating mental illness for what it is, an illness. Incidents like this are not the same as someone using a gun to commit a robbery. The root cause of mass shootings is mental illness, something that's treatable. We need to remove the stigma and help these individuals BEFORE they snap. If we had been doing that all along, 27 people might be alive today.

Well said flbikerchick. We find it either profitable or "fiscally prudent" to NOT treat mental illness. What is the cost of these lives? How much will it cost to bury them all? How much could these people (especially the children) have contributed to society had their lives been allowed to continue? For that matter how much is the anguish of the Lanza family worth?

While I've never been close to a situation as tragic as this one I've witnessed what a friend's family had to go through to get help for a child with issues stemming from mental illness. It was heartbreaking to watch all the hoops the family had to jump through as she went YEARS without the treatment that might have made her a more normal and productive member of society. Finally the assistance came...just before she aged out.

This is how WE ALL help build new Adam Lanza's. As the world's largest economy we should be ashamed.

bcwc,

Isn't it around 135 gun deaths per year in Canada?

3.2 Firearm Deaths in Canada

Over the past 25 years, there have been an average of 1,300 firearms deaths per year. Of the 1,125 firearm deaths in 1995, about 80.1 percent or 911 were classified as suicides; there were 145 homicides, representing 12.4 percent; and 49 unintentional deaths, for 4.3 percent of the total (Hung, 1997). These percentages have remained relatively stable over the past decade.

In 1995, there was a lower rate of firearm deaths per 100,000 population than there had been in the previous 25 years. In 1970, the rate per 100,000 population was 5.2. It increased to a peak of 7.2 in 1977, and declined steadily to a rate of 3.8 in 1995 (Hung, 1997).

3.3 Firearm Deaths–International Comparisons

Most countries have produced data on firearm deaths, allowing researchers to estimate the number of suicides, homicides and unintentional deaths by firearms, and to make international comparisons. Such comparisons must be made cautiously because of the different approaches that countries take in keeping records of public health and crime statistics. The data collected through the United Nations International Study on Firearm Regulation (1998) allow for some preliminary comparisons. Twenty-nine countries submitted statistics on the rate of firearm deaths per 100,000 population. The highest rates were reported by Columbia at 55.8, Brazil at 26.9 and the United States at 14 per 100,000 population. About 21 of the countries reported a rate of less than 5 per 100,000 population, including Canada at 4.1; Australia at 3; New Zealand at 2.9; and Sweden at 2.3. Nine countries reported a rate of one or less, including Japan at 0.07 and the United Kingdom at 0.6 (United Nations, 1998: 108).

www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/rs/rep-rap/1998/wd98_4-dt98_4/p3.html#a32

flbikerchick, agreed; well said. We have reduced spending for mental health over the past 30 years; closed mental hospitals and treatment centers due to lack of money. Those who most need mental health treatment are those most likely to be unable to keep a job; therefore, they don't have health insurance or the means to afford treatment--they fall through the cracks of society, are marginalized, and are stigmatized by society as a whole.

bcwc,

Canada had the misfortune of the big international drug organizations - since about 1990 - and especially on the west coast/Vancouver.

Have a lot of theories on why it happened then. Do you?

Backhouse

I am not sure of what you're talking about ... please elucidate me. I was in the fog of rearing a 2 year old at the time and everything but her was bull@!$%#.

blackcatwhitecat

As to the rest of us, a lump of coal and a spiked dildo called complacency to @!$%# ourselves with. Humbuggery!

WOW. What else can I say. WOW!

SickOfTheBickering

What else can I say when 20 families are buying coffins for their children instead of Christmas presents.

Jody fails to mention the great liberal mandate of the last two decades of having people with serious mental illnesses live among us instead of in hospitals where they belong. We have been told that institutionalizing these people is not right. We are now being told this is the guns fault. Well, had this person been in a hospital under the control that should have been forced on him, these children would still be alive. This issue is not about guns. It is about letting people who are known to be unsafe live in our neighborhood with little or no supervision. Liberals want them to live like "normal" people, and now blame the gun when this particular person with an illness could not be "normal".

Source: I previously managed a large organization responsible for doing this work.

in the middle - your stupidity is beyond belief. Liberals are not the reason the mentally ill are not in hospitals. President Regan is the one who cut funding for and closed hundreds of mental facilites because he just didn't think they should be funded.

Now, stupid - what's your argument? (Oh, you NEVER managed an organization responsible for dealing with the mentally ill or you would KNOW the facts!)

blackcatwhitecat

SickOfTheBickering

What else can I say when 20 families are buying coffins for their children instead of Christmas presents.

Agreed. It is a tragedy. And my heart (I know you dont believe it but I do have one) goes out to those parents. I have three children of my own and can only imagine the anguish those parents are going through.

However, knee-jerk reactions are not going to fix this problem.

I ask again...

After the terrorists used airplanes to kill thousands of people (young and old) on 9-11... did you call for a ban on all aircraft?

Sounds ridiculous doesn't it?

If 9-11 taught us anything, it's that a crazed mind, which desires to take a life (or many) WILL find a way (and a weapon) to do it.

SeekingSanity

in the middle - your stupidity is beyond belief. ...

Now, stupid - what's your argument? (Oh, you NEVER managed an organization responsible for dealing with the mentally ill or you would KNOW the facts!)

As always... Seeking's inhumanity toward her fellow man shines bright!

Way to go Seeking!

Now confirm my statement and show us what you are made of by casting some mean, nasty stone my way. Go ahead... I can take it.

After the terrorists used airplanes to kill thousands of people (young and old) on 9-11... did you call for a ban on all aircraft?

no, but I've been wearing slip-ons ever since some tried to blow up their shoes, and my laptop has been dusted for explosives at least a dozen times

yet, thousands are killed and wounded by firearms every year

And your point is?

Shoes have never killed anyone. And we are all still wearing them - even on airplanes.

Laptops are still carried on (not banned) and used on every flight.

Let me guess... you are still wearing underwear as well.

So what exactly is your point? These items were not banned. And actually, your examples help to prove my point as well.

IT IS NOT THESE OBJECTS THAT ARE HURTING PEOPLE. IT'S PEOPLE THAT ARE HURTING PEOPLE!

(silly libbies... can't put a coherent thought together.)

How many people can you kill in 10 minutes with your underwear?

Guns don't make people violent, but they make violent people highly effective.

Patriot Guard Riders

The group was formed in 2005,to shelter and protect the deceased's family against protesters from the Westboro Baptist Church

And so the circus starts.

And all the Families want to be is left alone to reach peace with what has happened and to try and understand the unimaginable.

It doesn’t and shouldn’t have to happen this way have to happen this way