No discussion on the theater shooting?

I guess I'll have to use an extreme (and trite) example. Just because someone walks up to home plate with a bat doesn't mean they can hit a baseball. As I understand it (and I'm never going to get one, so I'll never really know), the requirements to get a carry permit are very low and I don't know if they have to be renewed and what the renewal requirements are.

I must live a very unexciting life, because I've never been in any situation where a gun has been drawn on me or anyone else. I was in a theater once where we had to be cleared out because two guys got in a fist fight, but other than that it's pretty frickin' boring up here in Minnesota.

My whole point in this is that in these situations, having a bunch of folks with carry permits doesn't mean a whole lot unless they have training in how to react and shoot in a situation like that in the Aurora theater incident. Going back to my cop example I first cited, the police chief I spoke with told me that cops have to be re-certified monthly on the range for accuracy and also go through active refreshers on procedures when firearms are used in situations like the one we are talking about.

I want to repeat, I have no inherent aversion at my core being about gun ownership. People can buy as many as they want. People want to carry them; fine with me. I hesitate to call it arrogance, but there just seems to be this notion among some in the gun-carrying community that "as long as I've got my gun, I can take care of any situation" and I find that attitude prevalent in this discussion.

We can continue the circular argument. I've already admitted that a couple of people with guns would obviously have a greater probability of stopping a situation like Aurora than the total absence of guns in the audience, but that is simple math and nothing more. I just don't think the probability is that much higher.
 
goldfly said:
Australia and Japan etc don't seem to be having problems of shoot outs in theaters
Click to expand...

Remember the Akihabara massacre? Lunatics kill, even without guns. Even in Japan.

Not really making a point, except that I think it's very difficult to expel a compulsion to murder.
 
Hawk said:
Remember the Akihabara massacre? Lunatics kill, even without guns. Even in Japan.

Not really making a point, except that I think it's very difficult to expel a compulsion to murder.
Click to expand...

It's impossible to expel. But it's a lot easier to kill someone with a gun or other projectile weapon than any close quarters kind of battle whether it's knife or fists or choking. Murder will happen but it's easy when you have a killing machine.
 
Hawk said:
Remember the Akihabara massacre? Lunatics kill, even without guns. Even in Japan.

Not really making a point, except that I think it's very difficult to expel a compulsion to murder.
Click to expand...

you really want to compare crime and "mass killing" stats with Japan?

is Akihabara the exception or the rule in Japan?

are you more shocked to find out something like Akihabara happens in Japan or a school shooting or this theater shooting happens here?

you get where i am going with this my friend?
 
zitothebrave said:
Murder will happen but it's easy when you have a killing machine.
Click to expand...

The guy that perpetrated Akihabara used a truck and a dagger and killed 7 people and injured 12.

Remember the guy that drove into the Santa Monica Farmers Market? 10 killed, 63 injured -- in 10 seconds. Somebody tried to do the same thing in Venice Beach this summer.

All I'm saying is that people will find other ways, even without guns. That's not to say we shouldn't do anything about guns. But let's consider the broader issue.
 
Hawk said:
The guy that perpetrated Akihabara used a truck and a dagger and killed 7 people and injured 12.

Remember the guy that drove into the Santa Monica Farmers Market? 10 killed, 63 injured -- in 10 seconds. Somebody tried to do the same thing in Venice Beach this summer.

All I'm saying is that people will find other ways, even without guns. That's not to say we shouldn't do anything about guns. But let's consider the broader issue.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that, but to me, the broader issue includes the consideration that if we've got more people carrying, we've likely got more of this.
 
One today - with no one commenting on this or any of these:
Do we just now live with it or are we ready to address the problem??

Headline on HP-
FRIDAY: Student Gunned Down At South Carolina University... WEDNESDAY: False Shooting Scare At University Of Oklahoma... TUESDAY: One Dead In Purdue University Shooting... MONDAY: Student Critically Wounded In Widener University Shooting... LAST THURSDAY: Supermarket Shooting Leaves 3 Dead In Indiana...
 
There is nothing anyone can do about guns. If people want to shoot people, they will obtain a weapon regardless if it is outlawed.
 
goldfly said:
let's get rid of all laws then obviously
Click to expand...

Current ones aren't working but I know what will work, but let's not go there.

Hint: Police state..... cops come to your house and empty you of your weapons. Hunters will be pissed of course but the deers would love it.

Unless you have another idea to keep weapons from people wanting to kill people, everyone wants to hear your suggestion. But let me remind you that criminals or those who want to kill can get weapons ANYTIME they want regardless if you are like NYC where you can't have any.
 
AerchAngel said:
Current ones aren't working but I know what will work, but let's not go there.

Hint: Police state..... cops come to your house and empty you of your weapons. Hunters will be pissed of course but the deers would love it.

Unless you have another idea to keep weapons from people wanting to kill people, everyone wants to hear your suggestion. But let me remind you that criminals or those who want to kill can get weapons ANYTIME they want regardless if you are like NYC where you can't have any.
Click to expand...

That's the thing. The gun problem can't be fixed. It is what it is.
 
Krgrecw said:
That's the thing. The gun problem can't be fixed. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

That's a hella good attitude.

Keys to fixing gun problems that will never happen because lobbyists on both sides

1. Universal health care including mental health. You may be asking yourself what the 2 have to do with each other and it's well known that most mass shootings are done by someone with a mental disorder or some sorts, often times not being treated. Better overall mental health in this country is important.

2. Require more strict testing for and for retaining your gun. Police are typically required to recertify in firearm training very year or month. Some states have no standard for even certifying the first time they're capable of owning a gun. I also think as part of this usage of the testing is a course held by the police explaining the laws of the state, and how they are trained to use firearms.

3. Strict penalties for anyone found using a firearm or possessing a firearm that's illegal.

Those are the 3 basic things that could cut down on mass shootings. The first being the most important. The second would possibly stop shootings that aren't of the mass variety but done by people who may not quite fully grasp the gravity of the situation they're in or will be in when pulling a gun.

There are a handful of sad truths everyone has to come to realize in the pro-gun side. First is that pulling a gun can turn a situation that may have been a robbery or an assault adn turn it into a life and death situation, which you don't know how you or the person you're with would react. Maybe they stand down, or maybe they shoot first, or maybe you kill them, who knows, regardless your life will change drastically in many ways. Second is that the idea behind the second amendment of arming citizens to defend against tyranny is bunk. You owning an AK-47 won't stop the US government's tanks, stealth bombers, nuclear arsenal, etc. Sure you may be able to kill a few soldiers, but short of a mass uprising (read most of the population) not a thing good would come of it. In 2014 more so than maybe any point in the history of America, the pen is indeed mightier than the sword. Revolution has to happen via protest and legislation, because no militia stands a remote chance against the US war machine. The last is there needs to be a federal law regarding gun ownership. Some may not think this is important, some may think it's horrible (sturg) but you have some states where you can get a gun easily, and sure it's illegal to use that gun in some way or another in another state, but as has been stated a million times, someone who wants to commit a crime won't be deterred by laws. A single standard law that covers every state and every city with a standard to own and operate a fire arm is much better than leaving it in the current system. For example Alabama has some of the more lax laws on gun ownership (no permit needed for purchase, no registration, no ownership license required) what would stop someone from getting guns from Alabama and then moving them to tougher states to use as weapons? Of course even with strict laws people can get around them, but it's not as easy.

Last point on the subject is more of a soap box than contributing to the discussion, for the life of me I don't get why some republicans think they should own as many guns as possible and not need to have it registered or whatever, but think voter ID laws is cool. In what perverse universe does it make sense that owning a tool that's sole purpose is to kill should be easier to get than annual voting?
 
Krgrecw said:
That's the thing. The gun problem can't be fixed. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

That's the problem, it can't be fixed so they say they've got to do whatever they can. The easy thing is to take guns from law abiding citizens. Why aren't they putting their collective brain power towards figuring out a plan to get guns from criminals, or the people who supply criminals?

Yes, the kids shooting up schools and malls aren't career criminals, and probably got their guns from their parents, but these people aren't waking up one day and saying "I'm going to shoot up my school". They plan it out for weeks. If their parents didn't have guns, they can find guns elsewhere.
 
gtcway said:
That's the problem, it can't be fixed so they say they've got to do whatever they can. The easy thing is to take guns from law abiding citizens. Why aren't they putting their collective brain power towards figuring out a plan to get guns from criminals, or the people who supply criminals?

.
Click to expand...

That's a novel idea. It is a shame criminals and legal gun owners are always lumped together when discussing gun issues and resolutions.

A lot of people have guns as a family heirloom passed down from great grandfather to sons.... What ya gonna do about those? They might we worth a ton of money and those folks aren't just gonna let you "come n get" a gun that's worth a few thousand dollars, and means much more to them.
 
gtcway said:
That's the problem, it can't be fixed so they say they've got to do whatever they can. The easy thing is to take guns from law abiding citizens. Why aren't they putting their collective brain power towards figuring out a plan to get guns from criminals, or the people who supply criminals?

Yes, the kids shooting up schools and malls aren't career criminals, and probably got their guns from their parents, but these people aren't waking up one day and saying "I'm going to shoot up my school". They plan it out for weeks. If their parents didn't have guns, they can find guns elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Because the weapon industry has more money than pro-regulation organizations and thus more politicians in their pockets.
That will change in time. OR, when one of their family members is killed in one of these random acts .
and be sure it is juist a matter of time before a high profile person gets caught up in this.
Oh, wait, a while back a Congresswoman was shot. She survived but her Chief of Staff didn't.
Now, she is trying to fight the Weapons Industry -- I hear nary a peep out of any poster here supporting any of what she does. Matter of memory -- there was more defense of Sarah Palin than there is support for Gabby Giffords in the small sample that is this message board.

Perhaps that is the problem???
/////////////////////////

suppose we take weapons out of the equation of violent random acts?
and, violent random acts will not go away - isn't it written cain slew able?
Not, cain shot able
 
57Brave said:
Because the weapon industry has more money than pro-regulation organizations and thus more politicians in their pockets.
That will change in time. OR, when one of their family members is killed in one of these random acts .
and be sure it is juist a matter of time before a high profile person gets caught up in this.
Oh, wait, a while back a Congresswoman was shot. She survived but her Chief of Staff didn't.
Now, she is trying to fight the Weapons Industry -- I hear nary a peep out of any poster here supporting any of what she does. Matter of memory -- there was more defense of Sarah Palin than there is support for Gabby Giffords in the small sample that is this message board.

Perhaps that is the problem???
/////////////////////////

suppose we take weapons out of the equation of violent random acts?
and, violent random acts will not go away - isn't it written cain slew able?
Not, cain shot able
Click to expand...
Or perhaps the population tells their reps that they want to keep their guns? Maybe that's the general consensus?

And if so, isn't the govt doing what we want? After all, no gun regulation so far is working. I'll wait until I see a reg that might actually work before I support just making new regs for regs sake.

Like I said before, not separating out the legal responsible gun owners and nuts is well...lazy and won't get my support. I prefer the option of defending myself over waiting on the police if it came down to protecting my family. I am also a hunter. I enjoy it, and hope to teach my child the same.

My bolding of your first line didn't stick , but that was mainly what I was referring to.

You also have an unhealthy obsession with Palin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top