Shooting at Elementary School (est 27 dead)

[Ddrak]

Breivik is a false comparison in any case - the purpose of increased scrutiny on gun ownership isn't to prevent massacres but to reduce their incidence. Even with Breivik, Norway's still a long way behind the US in trends.

I don't see why mandatory gun registration (as Israel has, for example) would be any issue at all with the 2nd amendment. No prevention of ownership at all and simply matches the weapon to the owner because, after all, isn't that the whole point of the "guns don't kill people" argument?

I do think ammo restrictions will fail 2nd amendment scrutiny unless very narrowly tailored (and therefore likely ineffective).

Fundamentally though, it's a social issue at the core. Legal frameworks just exist to support the social desire.

Dd

[Arathena]

Breivik is a false comparison in any case - the purpose of increased scrutiny on gun ownership isn't to prevent massacres but to reduce their incidence. Even with Breivik, Norway's still a long way behind the US in trends.

I don't see why mandatory gun registration (as Israel has, for example) would be any issue at all with the 2nd amendment. No prevention of ownership at all and simply matches the weapon to the owner because, after all, isn't that the whole point of the "guns don't kill people" argument?

I do think ammo restrictions will fail 2nd amendment scrutiny unless very narrowly tailored (and therefore likely ineffective).

Fundamentally though, it's a social issue at the core. Legal frameworks just exist to support the social desire.

Dd

The primary social issue with gun control is wide-spread anti-government paranoia - the very same people that underpin of the tea party insist that they have the right to shoot at the CIA if they come by.

And the thing about a narrowly tailored law is that it is narrowly tailored if it achieves its goal with some level of technical efficacy and minimal collateral damage. We already have extensive laws that, while not completely banishing the private ownership of, oh SAWs and LMGs, makes it pretty unlikely that'll end up in the wrong hands. All we really need to do is redefine 'Destructive Device' to include any weapon with a magazine size over, oh, for shits and giggles, 12, with a sunset period to collect the damn things, and the provision that owning an extended capacity magazine is proof of intent to put it in a weapon, and make it worth a couple years in prison or a couple bajillion in fines. This just slows people down, which is the goal. My gut feeling is that it would also be relatively desirable to limit the magazine in weapons with a barrel length >18" to an internal, non-exchangable magazine, but I don't think that'll fly, and rifles & carbines aren't the preferred weapon used for mass shootings.

[Harlowe]

Absolutely agree with Arathena.

[Massterloo]

I'm amazed they are finally getting the ball rolling on this. Only took 20 kids in one spot to get killed. I personaly have no guns. I always wanted a gun, but never had a need for one. And too lazy. My mom, and sis both own Gloks Wow, I wonder if I get to Inherit them. Anyway, I've always loved the 2nd amendment.....kinda a fantasy - The US rebels taking back the US from the president made emperor. Kinda like the zombie fantasy.

Anyway, anyway, I'm very much for banning giant clips, and machine guns...in M-15....M-16...AK-47, and so on form. Well thats for making, and selling." In Fantasy land" I'm for getting americans to turn those in....reimbersed of course. Still allowing shot guns, and rifles. Hand guns? Lets still allow those.

Oh, and I'm for stopping gun show loopholes.

[Alluveal]

You know, I'm so worn out over the gun-rhetoric with some of the people on the right. This is what I hear:

"Yeah yeah yeah, tragedy, whatever, anyway, let me tell you about the 2nd Amendment. And, also, if someone wants to kill people, they'll find a way, even if you ban guns. They'll make bombs."

And I'm sitting here thinking about the guy we all knew who meticulously created bombs, bought the materials and gingerly assembled them, then stored them in a closet for a few years until the day came when they had a total mental breakdown, THEN, then snuck into a school and planted the bombs because 1st graders make great targets. . . .

Yeah, I don't know that guy either.

I mean McVeigh killed a lot of people. But, the guy wasn't nuts in my mind. He didn't just "break" one day and whip up a bunch of bombs. There was concise premeditation there.

A guy goes nuts and starts shooting kids (pretty much anything that moves) and suddenly this is EXACTLY the same thing as a bomb. Or the guy in Wyoming who shot his father in the head with an arrow.

I want to know when some of these folks will take responsibility. I don't get it. I really don't.

[Ddrak]

It doesn't help when there's completely random bullshit like this around: http://wapo.st/VXUKYC

i) Of course an assault weapons ban that doesn't reduce the number of assault weapons in circulation won't do shit. Talk about a strawman.
ii) Incidence of mental illness isn't correlated with violence, so locking up anyone that seems weird tends to be somewhat nazi, and
iii) Blame videogames.

(I found the link from one of my more rabid FB friends that I don't bother correcting)

Dd

[Alluveal]

Yeah, the only thing missing is putting the spotlight on D&D and saying that because people play RPGs, they turn Satanist, and kill people.

Yay for this dumbass.

[Embar Angylwrath]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

[Partha]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Oh, god, not this shit again.

Quick, tell me the last time someone ran off and started randomly injecting 20 kids with lethal doses of heroin.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Oh, god, not this shit again.

Quick, tell me the last time someone ran off and started randomly injecting 20 kids with lethal doses of heroin.

Quick, lets ban Knives, Swords and all sharp objects too.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Oh, god, not this shit again.

Quick, tell me the last time someone ran off and started randomly injecting 20 kids with lethal doses of heroin.

Quick, lets ban Knives, Swords and all sharp objects too.

Because people go on knife-wielding rampages that result in the deaths of dozens, right?

[Ddrak]

Banning assault weapons (properly, not half-assed) *does* keep them out of the hands of people that misuse them. Not completely, but it dramatically lowers the rate of misuse and there isn't a corresponding rise in other forms of violent crime.

Dd

[Ddrak]

What would Jesus do?

http://bit.ly/12xINzk

The Smart Samaritan

1. Just then a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he said, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 2. Jesus said to him, “What is written in the Law? What do you read there?” He answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” 3. And Jesus said to him, “You have given the right answer; do this, and you will live.” 4. But wanting to justify himself, he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

5. Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers. Fortunately, the man from Jerusalem was no fool and was carrying a big wooden club. So he beat the robbers senseless. Just then, a Samaritan came by to help him. 6. The man said to the Samaritan, “Don’t worry. They got what they deserved.” Later, though, the robbers’ friends waylaid the man. Together they had four clubs, so they beat up the man from Jerusalem. 7. Immediately the Samaritan, who had now learned a lesson, ran away, and sold his field, and with the money he purchased ten clubs. 8. The Samaritan armed his entire family, including his wives, his sons, his slaves and all his cattle and sheep. Among his heavily armed family was his elder son, who was angry at his father for not treating him as well his younger brother, who had spent all his money on loose living and had returned and was given a feast.” 9. “Lord, I’m getting confused,” said the lawyer. “Weren’t we talking about being a good neighbor?”

10. “Let me finish,” said Jesus. “The father knew that his son was angry, and potentially dangerous, so the father purchased an even bigger club that he hid under his bed. 11. That night, when father was asleep, the son came to father to apologize for being envious. The father, thinking it was a robber, hit him over the head. 12. Now which of these three, do you think, was a wise person?” said Jesus. 13. The lawyer said, “Actually, none of them. If the father hadn’t brought those weapons into his house, then no one would have gotten hurt.” Jesus was grieved at the lawyer’s blindness. 14. “You’re missing the point.” Jesus said. “It’s a violent world out there, and my advice is to purchase as many clubs as you can.” The lawyer was sad, for he was a peaceful man. 15. “Lord,” he said, “are you saying I should be like the Samaritan who has a houseful of weapons?” “Yes,” said Jesus. “Go and do likewise. And while you’re at it, buy me a club too.”

The New Sermon on the Mount

1. When Jesus saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak, and taught them, saying: 2. "Blessed are those who know how to defend themselves, for they will be secure. Blessed are those who arm themselves, for they will not be sorry. Blessed are those with one club, for they will be safe. 3. How much more blessed are those with two clubs, for they will be able to win a fight with those with one club. 4. Let the one who has two clubs buy four, and the one who has four buy ten. Let them increase clubs a hundredfold and a thousandfold.” 4. “But woe to you with no clubs, for you are asking for trouble. Woe to you who don’t arm yourselves heavily, for you’re just begging for people to steal your stuff. And I say, woe to you peacemakers, for you are wasting your time.” 5. The disciples were amazed. “Lord,” said Nathaniel, “Did you just say ‘Woe to the peacemakers?’ The last time you spoke on the Mount, you said they were blessed.” 6. “I changed my mind,” said Jesus. “Trying to make peace is impossible. Consider the world around you. Look at the beasts of the field. Do they not fight? Do they not tear each other apart with their sharp teeth? 7. It’s super dangerous. Do you think anyone can make peace? It’s a waste of time.” 8. The disciple whom Jesus loved said, “Lord, did you not tell us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us?” 9. “I’m re-evaluating that too,” said Jesus. 10. The crowd began to murmur.

“Quiet!” said Jesus, rebuking them with a word. “Look,” said Jesus, “talking about peace and nonviolence is fine until someone asks for your cloak, which is exactly what happened to me yesterday. 11. A beggar tried to take my cloak.” The disciples waited on his word. “Do you know what I did when he tried to take my cloak?” said Jesus. 13. James answered, “Lord, did you give him your cloak and some food as well?” “Are you kidding?” said Jesus, who was angry. “How long must I be with you? I beat him with my club. 14. That will teach people to try to take my clothes. That cloak cost five talents.” The disciples were filled with confusion and wondered what sort of teaching this was. 15. “Lord, how can we accept this teaching? It seems a violent way to live.” they said. “What about turning the other cheek?” Jesus looked at them with pity. 16. “Accept it or not,” he said. “All I can say is: Don’t be a wimp.”

Jesus Takes Care of Business in Gethsemane

1. While Jesus was speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived; with him was a crowd with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and the elders of the people. 2. Now, the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, "The one I will kiss is the man; arrest him." At once he came up to Jesus and said, "Greetings, Rabbi!" and kissed him. Jesus said to him, "Friend, do what you are here to do." 3. Then they came and laid hands on Jesus and arrested him. 4. Suddenly, one of those with Jesus put his hand on his sword, drew it, and struck the slave of the high priest, cutting off his ear. 5. Then Jesus said, "Good job! Cut off his other ear, too.” The disciples were amazed. But Jesus only repeated more loudly, “Cut off his other ear!” The disciples were shocked. 6. “Lord, didn’t you say, ‘All who take the sword will perish by the sword’?

7. Jesus said, “That was before I noticed that everybody else was armed to the teeth. How else will we be able to protect ourselves? Now I think that everyone needs free access to clubs, knives, swords, pretty much anything to defend themselves. 8. It’s a dangerous world out there. Even this garden isn’t safe.” Jesus looked at the disciples with pity, for they still did not understand. 9. “Wake up,” said Jesus. “Rome is corrupt and is likely to invade your houses. There are lots of brigands around too. Plus, the end of the world is coming, at least some time. That means every disciple for himself.” 10. “Lord,” said Peter, “you don’t sound like yourself.” “Well, maybe I’ve gotten smarter,” said Jesus. “I’m tired of being a sucker.” Judas smiled. 11. Jesus said, “Now, cut off his other ear.” So Peter took out his sword and cut the man’s ear off. Jesus said, “Finally. 12. Where can I buy more swords?”

Dd

[Garrdor]

Lets figure this problem out, guys. School shootings happen every day. I mean, all the kids in the US will be dead if we don't do something about it!

[Fallakin Kuvari]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Oh, god, not this shit again.

Quick, tell me the last time someone ran off and started randomly injecting 20 kids with lethal doses of heroin.

Quick, lets ban Knives, Swords and all sharp objects too.

Because people go on knife-wielding rampages that result in the deaths of dozens, right?

Same day as Newtown Shooting: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asi ... index.html

[Jarochai Alabaster]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Oh, god, not this shit again.

Quick, tell me the last time someone ran off and started randomly injecting 20 kids with lethal doses of heroin.

Quick, lets ban Knives, Swords and all sharp objects too.

Because people go on knife-wielding rampages that result in the deaths of dozens, right?

Same day as Newtown Shooting: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asi ... index.html

Was the fact that there were no deaths somehow lost on you?

[Arathena]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Oh, god, not this shit again.

Quick, tell me the last time someone ran off and started randomly injecting 20 kids with lethal doses of heroin.

Quick, lets ban Knives, Swords and all sharp objects too.

Because people go on knife-wielding rampages that result in the deaths of dozens, right?

Same day as Newtown Shooting: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asi ... index.html

Now - Count the corpses there. And count the corpses here. Not wounded, dead.

No one can or should pretend that limiting access to firearms is going to end criminal violence. But it does mitigate it. Yes. Brevik Anders still happened. He doesn't happen in Norway six times a year.

[Embar Angylwrath]

So what's the greater good for society?

A small fraction of people (yes, kindergarteners) getting killed by lunatics with access to guns, or a populace armed against the possible attackers of the rights of the people of the US, both foreign AND domestic.

As painful as the choice may be, the blood of innocents (which happen on a larger scale in an oppresive government, check your history books), is one of the prices we pay for an ever eroding government by the people.

While I sympathsize with Oz's attempt at gun control circa the early 70's, it is misguided, and lends more control to the government. We don't want that happening here. What if the British outlawed muskets for colonials? In the US, we have firearms so we can mount a defense against a tyannical government, should it arise.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

If banning weapons will keep them out of the hands of people who will misuse them, maybe we should ban heroin and meth.

Because people go on knife-wielding rampages that result in the deaths of dozens, right?

Same day as Newtown Shooting: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asi ... index.html

Now - Count the corpses there. And count the corpses here. Not wounded, dead.

No one can or should pretend that limiting access to firearms is going to end criminal violence. But it does mitigate it. Yes. Brevik Anders still happened. He doesn't happen in Norway six times a year.

A nut job went nuts on a bunch of kids, thats the story in both. The outcome is the difference.

In both cases Mental Health is the issue, not the type of weapon used.

[Ddrak]

A nut job went nuts on a bunch of kids, thats the story in both. The outcome is the difference.

In both cases Mental Health is the issue, not the type of weapon used.

Agreed, but the type of weapon directly resulted in children dead in one case and no children dead in the other. Let's not lose sight of that fact. Guns don't kill children. People with guns kill children. People with knives don't kill near as many children. Children growing up in houses with firearms are up to 40 times more likely to die from that firearm. Firearm ownership is highly correlated with increased risk of firearm death. Firearm availability is highly correlated with firearm death (and the lack of availability doesn't correlate with death from other weapons).

Embar's argument is the only rational one - you have to accept that innocent people will absolutely die for your "right" to have those firearms.

As painful as the choice may be, the blood of innocents (which happen on a larger scale in an oppresive government, check your history books), is one of the prices we pay for an ever eroding government by the people.

Except pretty much every other first world government out there has functional governments of the people and by the people without the pretence that having a handgun or even an assault rifle somehow secures you against your own government's armed forces. The most powerful force in any nation is the vote, not the gun.

An interesting aside - the 2nd amendment was drafted so that militias could be formed to protect the US from foreign invaders. There was never (and has never) been any legal concept of having a right to rise up against your own government. In fact, that was specifically included in the constitution prior to any amendments as "treason" which carries a death penalty. The idea that arming the populace protects you from a standing army is flat out ridiculous - always has been and always will be.

While I sympathsize with Oz's attempt at gun control circa the early 70's, it is misguided, and lends more control to the government.

Oz implemented effective gun control (wasn't just an attempt) in the late 90's. Took pump action and semi-automatic firearms effectively out of circulation. End result was reduced crime, reduced firearm related deaths and virtual elimination of "massacre" crimes (went from one per year to one in 16 years). Government has no more control because if they act up then we vote them out - we don't have the illusion that we can take on the police + armed forces over here.

What if the British outlawed muskets for colonials?

You would have had a bloodless transition to autonomous control like most other English colonies? Remember, the American Revolution was really just a subtext to the ongoing conflict between France and England in Europe at the time. Turned out interesting in the long term but wasn't that exciting to Europe back then.


Honestly, anyone that has some belief that they will fight back against a government that attempts to take their assault weapons (or whatever weapons) and that they are protected in that by the second amendment, should write a letter to the white house right now. Say something like:

Dear President Obama,

If you try to take my guns, I will kill you.

Signed,
<your name>

Tell me how it works out.

Dd