The Terrible Tragedy in CT, and what do we do about it?

[RRoller123]

My license took 14 weeks, interviews with the chief of police, medical checks, criminal checks, background checks, references from prominent people in my town. It is not remotely easy to get a license here. But at any rate, I am not saying that more guns = less crime, although this is statistically true in every single jurisdiction in the US where carry laws have been loosened.

The real difference is that Americans, for the most part, not all, believe that we humans, all of us, have a God-given right to protect and defend ourselves and our families, both from the criminal elements of society, but also from our own government. And most importantly, that this is an INDIVIDUAL right, that we do not need to depend upon government to protect us. I have great respect for the police, many are my friends, but the sad reality is that they are always the second responders to bad situations. The victim is the first responder.

We have a long history of this sort of thinking, it originates in our founding documents, and I guess it is by now kind of in our DNA. I understand how it looks to the outside world, but that's ok. Remember that the corrupt media present the country in a way that is completely dishonest. I can see how anyone looking in from outside would be baffled by it all. Watch "Baywatch", "MTV" and "The Price Is Right", "Jersye Shore" and "Big Ang", and anyone would think we are all insane. I am baffled by it myself sometimes too, but we are what we are. It has been a grand experiment and I am proud to have been a part of it, even as it seems to be unraveling before our eyes. <{:^)

[dmwhiteoak]

There is nothing I can say thast hasn't already been said. I stated in an ealier post that the direction of todays culture was headed down hill. My heart is broke for what those children and the parents are going through. I just can't wrap my mind around how someone could do such a thing. I have a few guns that I use for a variety of things. It would be a bad day when our political leaders tried to take them. Pete, My thoughts and prayers are with you brother, I hope your daughter mends well.

[RRoller123]

Thanks, she is fine as of today, and as a father, you know what it is like, especially when they are so young and a few thousand miles away...

[Jimb]

Sorry if I offend anyone with my comments here but...When someone says they have a right to bear arms to protect themselves and their family, I have to wonder where this is leading to.

If we say every family should have a gun to protect their household; then why not every college student, then every senior high, or junior high school student?; every employee who could be attacked ?; in fact why not arm every single person regardless of age, profession, race, religious faith, etc? After all, isn't everybody vulnerable to attack? Imagine if, when you reached a given age such as say 15, or whatever, you are given your gun for protection.

Yes, there would of course always be "legitimate" shootings. But think of the number of disastrous situations that would inevitably happen. The holder of the gun becomes the judge, jury and executioner. Who then could possibly keep any control in a society that has become responsible for policing itself?

Given the tremendous increase in violence and lack of respect we now see in our society compared to say 50 or 60 years ago, I worry that it will continue to escalate out of control unless drastic actions are taken such as exceptionally tough restrictions and screening on hollywood, video games etc...who have demonstrated complete disregard for "the good of society" within their industry....and also yes, strict gun control.

Jim

[dmwhiteoak]

No one has said no restrictions on gun control. There are restrictions on everything including obtaining a drivers license. Would you want a 10 year old behind the wheel of a 5000 lb vehicle on the same narrow road as you and your family? Absolutely not. Why would anyone even suggest that everyone should own them. We have laws in place now that control who can own what. Do we need to raid all the files of mental health facilities and forbid some from legal purchase? I think we already do. Some people do not have the mental stability to safley own a gun. Are there ways to identify these people that we don't already have records on? ? Absolutely . Common sence must be used . Uncle Ted pretty much sums it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8CAH6_PLF4

[Jimb]

It would seem the unsolved problem is, how strict of gun controls to implement, and who tells who whether or not they can own a gun?

Hmmm....it's always easy to identify a problem; it's coming up with a solution that satisfies everyone that is sometimes impossible.

Jim

[giuliot60]

I tend to agree with you Jim, but I'm not against having guns. I grew up in NYC and not many people had guns. My brothers had 22 cal rifles, but didn't really use them. I live in Charlotte now and every other person has one and it feels strange to me. I personally don't feel the need to own one, although I like shooting. Apparently the London police don't feel they need them either.

What I can't understand is why we need to have assault weapons. Can anyone explain that to me? And how do you gun owners feel about limiting access to ammunition? We have speed limits, and although we have 1st amendment rights we don't go yelling "Fire" in a packed movie theater.

I believe several things need to be addressed I don't understand the video game violence either.

I worked in the music industry for almost 20 years and don't see the need for violence there as well, but didn't feel like they were out of control.

I saw Ted Nugget as a back up to Black Sabbath in the 70s. Like his music, but he's a little over the top these days. But everyone has the right to their own opinion.

[Gunsmith]

When Florida created it's "shall issue" concealed weapons permit 20 years ago the media went nuts claiming we would have daily wild west gun fights in the streets. What happened was crime went down. Now there are still criminals trying to kill each other in the streets in some areas but the vast majority of them are not legally allowed to even posses one round of ammunition. There are now around one million concealed carry permit holders in the state not killing any innocent people.

[giuliot60]

Thanks, she is fine as of today, and as a father, you know what it is like, especially when they are so young and a few thousand miles away...

I'm glad your daughter's fine RR. If its any consolation, by brother in law just had an emergency appendectomy a couple of weeks ago and is doing fine.

My girls are 5 and 8, almost the same age as those in CT, and I found myself in tears many times watching the news this morning. I can't imagine.

[RRoller123]

Thanks Giulio, and I hope your BIL is doing well too! I just spoke with my daughter, and she is doing better today.

Let me offer something to the conversation here....

We responsible, legal gun owners must be viewed as a part of the solution to the violence that plagues us. We can't just always be attacked as the source of the problem. It is necessary, but it is not sufficient, to just continue to defend the second amendment and decry the anti-gun crowd. Now it seems to me that the common thread that comes up in these tragedies is the mental illness factor, that is apparent. But what is not talked about much, but is pretty obvious, is the access that the ill person had to weapons. This is an area where we can get on board to help quell the violence. I have no problem strengthening the storage or illegal possession laws. As I said in my facebook post, we have a 1 year mandatory in the big house here in MA for unlawful possession. NO ONE SERVES THE TIME! They either plead out or it gets dropped. They claim the jails are too full. I say build a new GD jail for these offenders. The police won't sweep the streets in Roxbury or Dorchester for fear of being called racists and being sued by the ACLU. They could get the guns off the street in a week if they would put in a mandatory 5 year for illegal possesion and ENFORCE it. And I would gladly pay more taxes (even in MA ) to build a new big house for the perps.

[Daniel]

This is a horrible tragedy and much of the population is effected by what happened including myself, I've been trying
not to think about it to much cause of the hopeless feeling that comes over me. The people effected in CT will never
forget such a heinous, senseless crime who's victims were undeniably innocent, children and teachers.

The fingers should be pointing at our movies and video games imo. Just watching how brutal and violent some of
these forms of so called entertainment can suggest we thirst for bloodshed as a society. I'm not sure how many
of you play video games or pay attention to the latest movies so here's a few links to judge for yourself if they take
things to far.

Grand Theft Auto 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vzue74y7A84

Call of Duty Black Ops 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dre21lBu2zU

Killing them Softly with Brad Pitt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDyaNnrgdp4

Gangster Squad - Official Trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRVvEHk7xOs

The Iceman - Official Trailer (HD)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=hdx ... =endscreen

I'm not endorsing these games and movies by posting links to them but asking A question, what kind of seeds are
being planted in the hearts and minds of our Children, why are so many people drawn to violence in their free time?
If we don't change the source of the problem weapons used will not matter there will always be evil people among
us, Timothy McVeigh used a truck filled with fertilizer to make A bomb killing 168 people.

[RRoller123]

Yep, you got it right. The guy who goes shooting on Saturday at the club with his buddies is NOT the problem. The guy who keeps his home defense weapon secured in a safe all the time is NOT the problem.

[Gunsmith]

What I can't understand is why we need to have assault weapons. Can anyone explain that to me? And how do you gun owners feel about limiting access to ammunition?

Go get some coffee or hot chocolate because this is going to be a long one.

The vast majority of what you may know about them is probably far from the truth if you've learned it from TV. The term "Assault Weapon" is by definition wrongly used by the media and pollititions. True assault weapons are fully automatic and have been regulated for 50 years of which there are literally thousands upon thousands in the hands of private citizens and have not been used in crimes.

The firearms referred to as "Assualt Weapons" are merly semi automatic rifles that look like "Asault Weapons" Which is like putting numbers and stickers on your car and claiming it's a NASCAR. Or calling our Spiders high performance Italian super cars like Ferarri.

In reality these firearms shoot ammunition with about half the power of the average hunting rifle and shoot no faster than old cowboy guns. I used to shoot matches called SASS (Single Action Shooting Society) which means the firearms used needed to be before 1900. That being said I could empty and reholster or stage all 4 of my guns in a stage in less than 20 seconds, that's two revolvers 5 rounds each, one shotgun 6 rounds and one lever action rifle with 10 rounds. So when people are so concerned about how fast a firearm shoots or how much ammunition it can hold is really misguided.

Semi automatic firearms do not have more power or shoot faster than firearms made over 100 years ago. They may be able to look more sinister to some people but they have no greater power. It's like painting our Spiders flat black and putting a big air scoop on the hood and big tires. They may look more powerful and corner slightly better but a new car of almost any type will out perform our little gems.

Semi automatic firearms are simply just more convenient to shoot. You just don't have to reload them as often. So if you limit the capacity of magazines the operator can simply carry more of them since it can be changed in less than a second with a little practice. If people have bad intensions they usually find away around whatever stands in their way.

Semi auto firearms are however more comfortable to shoot for women because the action of the reloading takes up some of the recoil. Think of the semi auto firearm as a single cylinder engine. The projectile is the piston and the ejection port is the valve. The main difference is there is no connecting rod to hold the projectile/piston in the cylinder/barrel just another piston waiting to be pushed into the cylinder. In bolt action rifles or revolvers the action does not move when fired so all of the recoil is felt by the user.

The functionality of a firearm is not the problem it is always the operator. Remember everything you see in the movies is misleading at best and probably absolutely false, I watched Bo and Luke Duke jump that old charger over more rivers than I could count as a boy and they just kept on driving!

I read a report with many illustrations of guns made in prison including semi automatic pistols. It was fascinating what people could make with rudimentary homemade tools under the watchful eye of armed guards so the idea that we would be safer if the firearms are band makes no logical sense.

Also aside from TV these firearms are used in less than 2% of crimes the vast majority of which were used by people prohibited from possessing any firearm. They are however used in civilian competition by men and women by the thousands every week with no one shot. Drunk drivers kill people every day but we gave up on prohibition, don't close bars or limit people's access to motor vehicles until after they have proven to be a threat.

As far as ammunition goes what would be the reason to limit this? Millions of Americans have 1000's of rounds of ammunition stored in their homes and do not harm anyone. It is not out of the ordinary to go through hundreds or even thousands of rounds of ammunition in a weekend of shooting. This number may seem high to a non shooter but the point is even though this goes on all the time the only time you hear about it is when one psyco crosses the line. Should you be limited in how much ammunition you can buy if you find a good deal on it and want to stock up like you would anything else in your house? The fact of the matter is hardly anything has the shelf life of ammunition. Your grand kids can shoot the ammunition your grandparents stored away. So if there really is no truly useful reason to ban a particular firearm or amount of ammunition because it has absolutely been proven that it will have no affect on criminals then why do it?

As mentioned earlier in this post most gun owners in this country will not just give up their guns, they will in fact fight to keep them. If we take this as the fact that it is why would we make them into criminals or pick a fight with them for no real expectation of safety? It just does not make sense. I would also fear any politician that wants to take away your property or rights of any kind for false security. History has shown us that this never works out well for those that gave up there rights.

Gun owners of every type are horrified by this tragedy and most wish they were there to try andstop it from happening as they do every day across the country only our media for some reason chooses not to report it. I however do not want to see my Mother, Wife or daughter robbed of their ability to protect themselves because someone misused something. I was at a seminar one time were the progun woman who gave the speech played the 911 tape of her being raped because she had no firearm to protect herself and the police were too far away to help her. This tape was so horrifying I almost vomited right in the middle of the seminar. This now mother of three will die before she gives up her guns, why would we make her?

Additionally automobiles, alcohol and swimming pools kill more children than any gun and there are plenty of restrictions on those and they still kill and are not garunteed by our consitution yet you do not hear politicians calling for their ban?

I am always bothered by the saying "We have to start somewhere" but why do we have to start in the wrong place? There are many ways he could have accomplished the same horrifying outcome without a gun but I will not list them here just in case someone reading this is unstable but I am sure even the nicest reader on this forum can think of many ways that would have been equally horrific.

Remember just because you don't understand something or someone's point of view does not mean you should be for it's elimination.

I hope I never use any of my firearms for anything besides sport but I hope if I ever need them for their other use of protection of myself, my family or even one of you I still have them to do so because I know for sure the bad guys will.

[BEEK]

well put, gunsmith

[giuliot60]

Thanks Jeff for taking the time to explain it to me. You make some good points. I think RRoller's point that maybe the gun people should be more involved with trying to find a solution (if a solution is at at all possible). You all know so much about the gun world, that you may have a better perspective. That said, many of the politicians are gun people, so wouldn't they have the same perspective?

Whatever does happen, I don't think anyone is going to take your guns away.