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

[steve8462]

i believe if guns become hard to get, it will become another thing coming across the border illegally with the drugs from mexico. the cartels are all about money, its not the commodity. its what ever they can sell for a fast profit.

[aj81spider]

Things that make you individually safer can make society less safe in aggregate. An example is large SUVs. An SUV is safer to drive, but the aggregate effect of millions of SUVs on society is that we are dependent on middle eastern oil, and we are forced to pursue foriegn policy that brings risk to America every day.

Guns are similar. Having a gun may make each of you individually safer. If they made society safer then America would be the safest place in the world. We currently have 88 guns per 100 people in the U.S. The next highest country is Serbia at 56. Despite this proliferation of firepower (perhaps making each of you safer individually) the US has the highest rate of incarceration in the world, one of the highest murder rates in the civilized world, and not one post on this thread has expressed anything but concern over safety.

It seems unlikely that there will ever be meaningful restrictions on guns in the U.S. However, just like cheap gas, we should be sure that we understand and continue to be willing to make the societal tradeoffs that come with that.

[Jimb]

People are responsible for themselves in a free society. Today, more than ever, people want our government to solve problems and dictate actions. The more Government steps in to dictate how we should act the more we as a society have people that do not know how to act and our individual liberties are erroded.

It is so easy to say I can do whatever because it is my individual right and freedom. Government creates laws and regulations, and the ONLY reason we need any law is because people do not exercise common sense. Some laws are no-brainers; it's illegal to kill someone. While others are more contentious; it's illegal to drive too fast. Well how fast is too fast given the road conditions? Many have argued that one with the cop (and blamed him for catching you) rather than try to have the speed limit changed. But ALL laws are there because some in any society (a very general description...not intended to point out anybody here) abuse others for self interests or advancement.

Some people (like Ted Nugent as pointed out earlier in this thread) will chose which laws they will respect and which they will ignore simply because they consider that law offensive to them and no one tells him what to do. After all, he's a singer for God sake!! And unfortunately entertainers get access to multi-media so their opinions are heard by many and is supposed to matter to us...as if they are experts on EVERYTHING.

Every time a law is created it erodes "our" individual liberties. So what? For example; hollywood and computer games manufactures vs rights and freedom of speech. They are, in most people's opinion, abusing their rights and freedom of speech and negatively influencing (teaching) our youth all for the mighty dollar. So, to me it would seem a new or revised law is required to (further) restrict their actions. Yes is erodes their freedom. So what? It's for the good of our society in general even though it will upset some short-term. That's what I rely on my government for. Listen to what the majority wants and act, even though it is impossible to please everyone. Take charge and lead.

Jim

[RRoller123]

Things that make you individually safer can make society less safe in aggregate. An example is large SUVs. An SUV is safer to drive, but the aggregate effect of millions of SUVs on society is that we are dependent on middle eastern oil, and we are forced to pursue foriegn policy that brings risk to America every day.

Guns are similar. Having a gun may make each of you individually safer. If they made society safer then America would be the safest place in the world. We currently have 88 guns per 100 people in the U.S. The next highest country is Serbia at 56. Despite this proliferation of firepower (perhaps making each of you safer individually) the US has the highest rate of incarceration in the world, one of the highest murder rates in the civilized world, and not one post on this thread has expressed anything but concern over safety.

It seems unlikely that there will ever be meaningful restrictions on guns in the U.S. However, just like cheap gas, we should be sure that we understand and continue to be willing to make the societal tradeoffs that come with that.

Doesn't hold up to a logical evaluation of the data. Just look at Vermont... No permit required for purchase, no permit required for concealed carry. A state absolutely awash in guns, and yet quite lovely and peaceable, extremely low crime and violent drime rates. The problem in the US has been and remains cultural as was the point of my first post to start this discussion off. It is one of those little obvious but inconvenient truths that are just so hard to accept because they don't fit the preconceived narrative.

[steve8462]

this country creates laws to protect the stupid and lazy from themselves! just read the warning labels on any product. "dont use a hairdryer while in the bathtub" REALLY? my dad always said people doing stupid stuff and getting killed was gods way of culling the herd! how come black folks can call themselves the "N" word, but if we do it all hell breaks loose? thats only one of a million examples for every race, religion, gender, ETC........ the double standards in the US is unreal!
big business and the congressmen and senators are taking the very laws this country was founded on and using them to their advantage for personal gain. our forefathers would be so ashamed because this country was founded on truth, respect and basic human rights.

[Gunsmith]

Earlier I said get something to drink this time you may want to add a snack.

Surferingfreeman I actually do believe what I wrote but only because it’s true. I also understand that when people have believed something most of their lives they do not like to change their mind whether they see facts to the contrary or not that is just basic human nature. Now I am not suggesting you feel I am presenting you with facts and you are ignoring them I fully understand you feel I am in denial of the facts as well and neither one of us will probably convince the other that our position is the correct one at least not on a forum based on our mutual admiration of old inexpensive Italian cars anyways. Maybe we can meet in Costa Rica one day and I can enlighten you between sets, I would come to California but I’m not man enough to surf in your cold water.

I also don’t expect those of you from other countries to fully understand why we Americans hold so tightly to our Second Amendment rights. But you may want to recognize that the few freedoms our brothers around the world enjoy have been largely gained by the acts of dedicated people that fought for their freedom a long time ago in our country.

As you may have noticed I tend to use a lot of analogies in my points. This is my attempt to help those that have not had the opportunity to learn or understand a particular subject but may be able to relate it to one they do know. I am not trying to get off topic just broaden the understanding of it.

I drove up from South Florida to North Georgia last night to spend some last minute quality time with my mother in-law. She was diagnosed with stage 4 Inoperable Cancer throughout her body about a week ago and unfortunately does not appear to have much cognizant time left with us. I feel so blessed to have this time to hold her and tell I love her and to say good bye. Unfortunately those in Connecticut did not have this opportunity and I pray I never know firsthand how they feel.

Myself and I would say most of the gun owners I know would gladly give up all they had including their guns to bring just one of those victims back unfortunately this is not an option what’s done is done.

My mother in-law was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1984 at which time she quit smoking and sought the latest treatment available. She was given three years on the outside at that time. Today she is finally suffering the ultimate consequences for her old habit of nearly 30 years ago. Now I am told smoking related illnesses kill more than anything including firearms. Yet they are not banned? Granted they are now banned in certain areas or buildings but you can still buy them and poison your body with them as well as the body of the child next to you. Tobacco use is not guaranteed by our constitution and from what I can see serves no positive use other than a temporary satisfaction of an addiction. Also many in her generation were introduced to their habit by our own government in the military and then brought it home to their friends and family to become addicted with them. In recent years the Tobacco industry agreed to pay a portion of their future profits to states to cover some of the health care costs associated with the use of their product. In return our government who gets paid by them granted the Tobacco companies immunity from law suits. The point I am making her is that if we are all really concerned about saving lives then why aren’t we banning cigarettes? I even hear demands for smoker’s rights. Now we are told we have to buy insurance just because of our mere existence on this planet to cover health care costs? So even though tobacco causes all these problems and costs our country and society so much money those of us who choose not to use the product still have to pay for it with our lives and money. Does this seem like hypocrisy yet?

Also on our trip we saw several lighted signs that stated 1,120 people had lost their lives on Georgia highways this year alone. Many of these lives lost as we all know are a direct result of drinking and driving. Yet we still sell cold beer for the ride home and make it illegal for police to wait down the street from bars to pull over suspected drivers under the influence before they kill because it is supposed to violate their civil rights. If we are lucky enough the drunk driver makes it home without killing one of our children then we need only wait for the domestic violence to start. Many unwanted unplanned children come into this world as a result of alcohol only to be abused by those who are supposed to care for them but cannot as a result of their addiction. Yet we promote the use of alcohol all over the world.

Now both of these vices are not guaranteed under our constitution and my wife cannot protect herself or my daughter against the evil that exists in this world with them. However if you tried to ban them there would be riots in the streets. This is why I cannot accept the argument that we have to do something like leave the rest of us vulnerable to receive a false promise of more security from the evil that exists in this world.

If people truly wanted to make changes they would start with themselves as stated in a previous post.

Soon you will see the politicians and the media vilify, divide and blame gun owners for the problems of this world. Even if you do not understand the difference between firearms or why millions of Americans own them you should be able to grasp the concept that it is not worth turning them into villains or victims. Ban one you might as well ban them all it will make no difference and will eventually end there anyways.

The attention span our country and perhaps the world has is so short today few people will take the time to learn the facts or ponder the true consecuinces of giving up their rights for unicorns and fairytales.

[aj81spider]

Doesn't hold up to a logical evaluation of the data. Just look at Vermont... No permit required for purchase, no permit required for concealed carry. A state absolutely awash in guns, and yet quite lovely and peaceable, extremely low crime and violent drime rates. The problem in the US has been and remains cultural as was the point of my first post to start this discussion off. It is one of those little obvious but inconvenient truths that are just so hard to accept because they don't fit the preconceived narrative.

Of the 50 states Vermont ranks 32 in gun ownership:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... -2012.html

Vermont gets the same movies, their kids played the same video games, and the same TV shows are broadcast into the state. If by cultural you mean that in Vermont you're less likely to get cut off in traffic, get into a road rage incident and use the gun in your glove compartment to settle it, then you could be right.

The issue with guns is that people feel empowered by them, and it is far too easy to take an irreversable action that results in death. While I'm sure you can keep your temper in check and not escalate a situation because you feel empowered by having a gun I have less faith in humanity in general. One widely publicized example is the neighborhood watch guy in Florida who felt empowered to challenge someone in his neighborhood, rather than calling the police. The situation escalated, someone got killed and someone is on trial. Without a gun that would have been a far different incident.

[Gunsmith]

AJ you will find that you may have the facts very wrong in this case here in Florida remember the media only feeds you the facts they wish you to have at the time. There is a lot more to this case that will eventually come out.

[RRoller123]

Regarding the Daily Beast data, it is flawed because it is based upon background checks over the last 12 months. In VT, I can go up there as a MA resident and carry concealed. Anyone can. But regardless, using data like the number of background checks over the past 12 months has absolutely nothing to do with the number of legal guns in the population. The place is awash with guns, as is Maine and NH. All have very long pro-firearms culture and are pretty low crime states, except recently NH which has seen drug gangs from NY and MA move into Manchester and Nashua. The Daily Beast is unfortunately one of those reliably L/P/C sites that take a preconception and then look to find data that they think will fit the narrative. Doesn't work in this case, pretty obvious.

[aj81spider]

Perhaps the Washington Post is less biased? And a different methodology - a survey of people rather than using background checks. If I've counted right (always a dubious proposition), on this list (which includes entities other than states like Puerto Rico and Guam) Vermont has 34 entities ahead of it, and it has a gun ownership rate 10% lower than the US in general.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/he ... rship.html

[Martin124]

I also don’t expect those of you from other countries to fully understand why we Americans hold so tightly to our Second Amendment rights. But you may want to recognize that the few freedoms our brothers around the world enjoy have been largely gained by the acts of dedicated people that fought for their freedom a long time ago in our country.

As someone from another country I have followed this discussion with great interest. The circumstances that have brought everyone to this point are very tragic and have broken the hearts of people all over the world.

I have tried to understand the American view of gun ownership rights and I feel a little enlightened by many of the comments here.

I'm just not sure what Gunsmith means in the above quote.

[FulviaHF]

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
-- Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in District of Columbia v. Heller [2008]

It's fun to vent opinions, but for anyone who's interested in what the Second Amendment actually means, here's the link to that opinion and the dissent:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
It's a very thorough analysis, and it's the current SCOTUS jurisprudence on the amendment. But it was a 5-4 opinion, so we don't know how the Court might come down on a different Second Amendment question; Heller only directly addressed possession of a handgun in the home for personal defense. Based on his reasoning, I suspect Scalia would find an outright ban on AR-15s and similar 'military-style' semi-automatics to be unconstitutional. But the split might go the other way on that question.

[spider2081]

First I don't personally own a gun.
I do find it had to take that the new way to control guns offered by our politicians in the USA is to heavily tax bullets and guns so they are less available to the general public.
Here is an interesting video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G79qCDlo ... e=youtu.be

I am saddened for all affected by this mass killing. I believe there is some basic flaw in our society some of it is guns some main streaming mentally ill, some is media coverage, some basic human values we all lack that allows these things to happen. Emotional public outrage will generate a band aid fix but not a long term solution.

[htchevyii]

I'm glad to see some level heads here and such good points have allready been made that all I have is my personal experience to add. I spent the last few days debating a friend on the subject and finally just agreed to disagree. I've been shooting since I was a little kid. Never had an accidental discharge, or had to use a gun in self defense. First and foremost we were taught respect, not just for guns, but for people. I heard a gun shot the other night, it was just my neighbor taking care of a preditor killing his chickens. Urban dwellers need to realise that for the rural population guns are a way of life and more necessary than you will understand. They are used daily by farmers and ranchers and many folks here have been shooting and hunting their entire life. They are used for protection from bears and mountain lions whose populations have exploded and will continue to do so with the recent ban on dogs being used for bear hunting. I've been stalked by a bear and know several others that have been stalked by bears and stalked or malled by mountain lions. If you live in a remote location, help can be hours away, if your phone will even get out. If you live in an urban area, you could have a different perception on guns since you may have seen them used more for negative things than the positive ones we see and nothing that I say is going to change that. I think the biggest issue today is parenting and the media movie and video game industry's obsession with violence.
I don't know what crime is like elsewhere in the country, but it seems to be skyrocketing here. The jails are full, and you have to do a violent crime or be wanted on several warrants to even spend a night in jail. The district attorney said this in the paper, so it's a free for all. The other day the police caught a lady robbing a house for the second time in two days. She led the police on a high speed persuit and possessed heroin. She was BOOKED AND RELEASED! Three of my five closest neighbors are growing marijuana. The local DA won't prosecute for under 99 plants. I'm just waiting for someone to come and try to rob the wrong house. I'm out of the city limits and the Sherriffs dept is based 25 miles away, so we might as well be on our own. One of my friends caught a burger on his game camera inside his house and he Sherriffs department said there was nothing they could do, but slap him on the hands. They told him he would be better off taking care of it himself and slipp him the perps name, (of course they recognized him)!
After a tragedy like this, and it is horrific, people immediately overreact. Yes, guns are usually the weapon of choice for a crime like this, they are the easiest way for the sicko to accomplish their goal. Assuming you could actually keep them from getting a weapon, (even if every gun in the US miraculously disappeared, it would just start a new business for he cartels), they would just get more creative. In China, they have had several school stabbing incidences lately and I'm sure that once someone threw pipe bombs inside classrooms, that would be copied by more sickos. Hijack a bus and drive in into the river?
I am all for gun regulations that would actually make a difference and not just affect the law abiding citizen. Maybe periodic background rechecks? Tougher penatilies for those caught with guns that are not allowed them? Things like jacking up the price of ammo for instance, would only affect legitimate sportsmen and recreational shooters, the criminals are going to pay whatever they have to for bullets or just steal them.
I don't really understand all of the hype over "assault weapons". I really think that it is just because they look "scary". I've shot a few and in my opinion they're not even very accurate guns. Gunsmith is correct in that a good shooter can shoot even a single action revolver or lever action rifle unbelievable fast and accurately. I would be interested to see statistics as to the number of shootings with assault weapons vs pistols. I would think that the pistols would be much higher just because they are more concealable.

[Gunsmith]

As we will begin to watch the Politicians claim to help us by making new laws to make us safer let us accept some certain facts on the issue no matter what side of gun ownership you are on.

Politicians and much of the media report and act is if there are not gun laws or current laws that already address all these issues on the books now but they are just not used. Thus trying to get all of us to demand more laws for our own safety seems disingenuous to me. What good is making another law if we are ignoring the ones we already have?

Bad people and mentally ill people use firearms as one of their tools to carry out their crimes. These people also use any weapon even items not intended to be a weapon to attack their victims so the absence of firearms will not stop them from committing their heinous acts it will merely change the tool used. Gasoline and matches will still be available.

Gun law violations are usually the easiest to prove and are routinely the first charges dropped in a plea deal.

It is already illegal for convicted felons, those under a domestic violence restraining order, found guilty of domestic violence and those deemed to have mental conditions by a court of law to even posses one round of ammunition let alone a firearm.

Police officers both active and retired are caught selling firearms without background checks as in Miami just recently.

It was just reported the 2nd in command of the ATF lied on his own forms to purchase a gun and then resold his gun over the internet. This was not part of some sting operation it was just something he did.

The FBI gave millions of dollars of our tax money to Drug Cartel gun buyers to purchase thousands of guns and the ATF allowed them to go straight to the drug cartels in a supposed feeble attempt at tracking them.

There are already laws on gun locks and gun storage on the books.

Guns are illegally manufactured all over the world every day for the sole purpose of being sold to those that should not have them.

Even if guns are banned criminals would not give theirs up.

Hundreds of millions of guns and trillions of rounds of ammunition already exist in this country today. The vast majority remain perfectly still.

Banning firearms does not make them disappear it only limits access to them by law abiding people.

A large number of these currently law abiding gun owners claim they will fight to the death before they will give up their guns.

Firearms are used to protect innocent lives every day but these defensive acts go largely unreported by most of the media.

If guns were banned and only law enforcement was able to possess them they would become the new target of criminals. Is this fair to them?

Firearms are stolen from law enforcement every day.

I just watched Doug Schoen former Clinton staffer on TV say “We need to get rid of those multi magazine clips”. I think we should also get rid of flying purple people eaters too. The reason I bring this up is we are asking for laws to be made by people that don’t know anything they are talking about.

Even if you do not own or understand firearms I would beware of those that try to convience you to give up that right for a false sense of security.