[StylinRed]

think this topic is straying a bit too far into the "guns for everyone and the media wants to brainwash you into thinking they're evil" especially considering the topic...

[SkinnyPupp]

I assume you are speculating that return fire at the active shooter by legally armed citizens would increase the death toll in this situation.

Did you not read the Tacoma Mall shooting? Or the Clackamas Town Center shooting? Even the Appalachian School of Law shooting? All involved legally armed citizens confronting the active shooter. In none of these cases were innocent bystanders shot by legally armed citizens. In two of these cases legally armed citizens chose NOT to fire because innocent bystanders were behind their target, in the line of fire.

CCW holders are not brazen vigiliantes out to shoot first and ask questions later. They follow the four fundamental safety rules, the relevant one in this case being be sure of your target and what is in front of and behind it.

Is everyone not surprised that these documented cases of active shooters being confronted by CCW holders were not widely publicized by the national news media? I'm betting almost NO ONE here has heard of the Appalachian School of Law shooting. It happened three years after Columbine and generated little news. Does no one believe that the national news media like CNN and MSNBC have their own agenda? They are profit making ventures! Read the Wiki page I posted about defensive incidents involving firearms and tell me how many of those you heard on the news.
In a theatre, do you want people shooting back and forth?

And you found three examples of it "working". You can probably find 10 more where it didn't "work"

If you are arguing that more guns is safer than less guns.. well, just leave it at that...

[StylinRed]

CONNECTICUT SCHOOL SHOOTING AND AURORA COLORADO MOVIE THEATER SHOOTING IN BATMAN DARK KNIGHT RISES - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_fLwgRlMbvE)


come on seriously... :facepalm:

[Manic!]

CCW holders are not brazen vigiliantes out to shoot first and ask questions later. They follow the four fundamental safety rules, the relevant one in this case being be sure of your target and what is in front of and behind it.




and priests are good people. Just because a person is a CCW holder does not make him a good person.

Texas man accidentally fires gun in Walmart, police say | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/24/texas-man-accidentally-fires-gun-in-walmart/?test=latestnews)

Texas man accidentally fires gun in Walmart, police say

Published July 24, 2012

FoxNews.com

A Texas man injured two people and himself after he accidentally fired his handgun Monday night while standing on line at a Walmart store, police said.

MyFoxDFW.com reported that the suspect, who was not identified, accidentally fired his gun while he reached into his wallet at the Dallas-area store. The bullet hit the man in the buttock and shattered on the ground. Fragments hit a child in the leg and a woman in the foot, the report said.

The suspect, who has a concealed handgun license, apparently panicked and took off running, but was soon caught by police.

He faces evasion charges and injury to a child.

[StylinRed]

+ all the shootings that happened even recently where a person "felt threatened" and murdered someone

like that kid who went to buy some candy at the corner store

[rocksforsale]

BACK to the actual incident...

the family of the shooter speaks out

Connecticut Shooting: Adam Lanza's Father Expresses Condolences : People.com (http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20656736_20657014,00.html)



father: Peter lanza Tax Director and Vice President of taxes at GE general electric
mother: owned the three firearms for self defence, says the aunt
brother: CA at ernst & young

apparently the parents divorced a few years ago and Adam's brother and father hasn't seen him in two years. but i feel bad for the family, and what the lanza name is know associated with. i wonder how the father will be affected by this, being an exec at such a large firm

from the cnn artical: Adam Lanza's family: Mom liked parlor games, guns; dad, a tax exec, remarried - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/15/us/connecticut-lanza-family-profile/index.html)

Adam Lanza had no known criminal record, a law enforcement official said.
A member of Lanza's family told investigators that he had a form of autism, according to a law enforcement official who spoke under condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the investigation.
Acquaintances struggled with fathoming the deadly actions being attributed to someone they had known.
Alex Israel was in the same class at Newtown High School with Adam Lanza, who lived a few houses down from her.
"You could definitely tell he was a genius," Israel told CNN, adding she hadn't talked with him since middle school. "He was really quiet, he kept to himself."
His former bus driver, Marsha Moskowitz, told CNN affiliate WABC that he was "a nice kid, very polite" like his brother.
"It's a shock to even know (the family)," she said. "You can't understand what happened."
A former classmate told CNN affiliate WCBS that Adam Lanza "was just a kid" -- not a troublemaker, not antisocial, not suggesting in any way that he could erupt like this.
"I don't know who would do anything like this," the classmate said, before walking away distraught. "This is unspeakable."

[rsx]

It's all about parenting.

The gun control/ban issue will only further polarize opinions. Gun advocates will argue that someone with a burner could've stopped the kid. While on the other side, people will argue that if he didn't have access to weapons the damage wouldn't have been as destructive.

The real issue is why was an autistic kid allowed such easy access to 3 firearms and ammo? What were the parents thinking? Despite the divorce, the father should be held responsible.

I've been a strong proponent for the need to regulate having kids (through extensive licensing, parenting courses, education and income ability/potential).

Similarly, dogs' teeth are a deadly weapon, like a gun. Are we all supposed to file them down or take them all out? No, any responsible dog owner would spend the time and train the dog; and if an irresponsible owner lets an attack happen he/she is accountable. Parents should be held accountable.

Unleashing a human being into the world should be a carefully thought out process, you just can't fuck around have a bunch of kids and not teach them anything, (monitor them if they're unwell).

[Manic!]

I've been a strong proponent for the need to regulate having kids (through extensive licensing, parenting courses, education and income ability/potential).



Forget banning guns just ban people.

[rsx]

Forget banning guns just ban people.

I don't mind seeing certain demographic groups be banned from reproducing. Crackheads, gangbangers, uneducated preteens, extreme religious fundamentalists, etc.

[StylinRed]

yeah and everyone who shouldn't be allowed to have kids should also wear a patch on their clothes or maybe have it noted on their drivers license so that people/govt./etc would know ;)

[Noir]

+ all the shootings that happened even recently where a person "felt threatened" and murdered someone

like that kid who went to buy some candy at the corner store

For a sec there, I thought you were talking about Treyvon Martin who got shot for practically just looking sketchy with his hoodie.

[rsx]

yeah and everyone who shouldn't be allowed to have kids should also wear a patch on their clothes or maybe have it noted on their drivers license so that people/govt./etc would know ;)

It's not about ostracizing a group of people, I'm saying it would be relevant to have a licensing, education and evaluation program for people who want to have kids.

[bballguy]

For a sec there, I thought you were talking about Treyvon Martin who got shot for practically just looking sketchy with his hoodie.

.............that IS who he is talking about.......:suspicious:

[StylinRed]

For a sec there, I thought you were talking about Treyvon Martin who got shot for practically just looking sketchy with his hoodie.

i was :)
was making a point about how those with conceal carry permits aren't always safe/cautious like jlo would have us believe

[trollface]

Saw this in the paper.
Srs, if they can't even correctly spell the weapons with a simple Google, should they really be commenting at all on this? I can only imagine how much misinformation is in the whole article if they can't even bother to spell check.

http://s9.postimage.org/8x13wu5f3/2012_12_16_23_22_49.jpg

"Ushmaster"
"Sigsauer"
Picture of Glock19, article says Glock17. Shooter used G19.

[StylinRed]

Saw this in the paper.
Srs, if they can't even correctly spell the weapons with a simple Google, should they really be comment at all on this? I can only imagine how much misinformation is in the whole article if they can't even bother to spell check.

http://s9.postimage.org/8x13wu5f3/2012_12_16_23_22_49.jpg

"Ushmaster"
"Sigsauer"
Picture of Glock19, article says Glock17. Shooter used G19.

i agree :troll:

[threezero]

you can't imagine how much crap is in Chinese newspapers indoctrinating the minds of c lais

[Harvey Specter]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q3zWRhb65Nw/UM52zUAj6vI/AAAAAAAAKgA/3ux7hi_7MMY/s1600/Sandy%2BHook%2Bvictims-707834.png

[Jason00S2000]

For a sec there, I thought you were talking about Treyvon Martin who got shot for practically just looking sketchy with his hoodie.

http://westorlandonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/george-zimmerman-bloody-photo-20121203-224x300.jpg

[Hondaracer]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q3zWRhb65Nw/UM52zUAj6vI/AAAAAAAAKgA/3ux7hi_7MMY/s1600/Sandy%2BHook%2Bvictims-707834.png

Brutal
Posted via RS Mobile

[Durrann]

Putting faces to those names just makes it that much more trajic
Posted via RS Mobile

[hotshot1]

I don't think prohibition has ever worked as it was intended to.

For example, if guns were banned outright, the people who follow the law would be turning them in. If you're used to robbing people or have plans to shoot up an elementary school, you're gonna disregard the rules. Then you're in a situation where the most dangerous members of society have access to killing machines while the rest of the people aren't able to defend themselves.

I know there are no-firearm zones such as elementary schools and even theaters like the one in the Colorado shooting. Maybe the solution in schools is having the principal or another willing teacher to go through firearm training, allowing one gun to be kept in a secure office in case of another shooting incident.

[Gumby]

A good look at what's its like to parent someone with mental illness; a parent who's someday worried that she may be raising her own Dylan Klebold or Eric Harris but doesn't have the heart to send him to jail.

This article really focuses on the problem of dealing with mental illness rather than gun control.

The Anarchist Soccer Mom (http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.ca/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html)


In the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.

Three days before 20 year-old Adam Lanza killed his mother, then opened fire on a classroom full of Connecticut kindergartners, my 13-year old son Michael (name changed) missed his bus because he was wearing the wrong color pants.

“I can wear these pants,” he said, his tone increasingly belligerent, the black-hole pupils of his eyes swallowing the blue irises.

“They are navy blue,” I told him. “Your school’s dress code says black or khaki pants only.”

“They told me I could wear these,” he insisted. “You’re a stupid bitch. I can wear whatever pants I want to. This is America. I have rights!”

“You can’t wear whatever pants you want to,” I said, my tone affable, reasonable. “And you definitely cannot call me a stupid bitch. You’re grounded from electronics for the rest of the day. Now get in the car, and I will take you to school.”

I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

A few weeks ago, Michael pulled a knife and threatened to kill me and then himself after I asked him to return his overdue library books. His 7 and 9 year old siblings knew the safety plan—they ran to the car and locked the doors before I even asked them to. I managed to get the knife from Michael, then methodically collected all the sharp objects in the house into a single Tupperware container that now travels with me. Through it all, he continued to scream insults at me and threaten to kill or hurt me.

That conflict ended with three burly police officers and a paramedic wrestling my son onto a gurney for an expensive ambulance ride to the local emergency room. The mental hospital didn’t have any beds that day, and Michael calmed down nicely in the ER, so they sent us home with a prescription for Zyprexa and a follow-up visit with a local pediatric psychiatrist.

We still don’t know what’s wrong with Michael. Autism spectrum, ADHD, Oppositional Defiant or Intermittent Explosive Disorder have all been tossed around at various meetings with probation officers and social workers and counselors and teachers and school administrators. He’s been on a slew of antipsychotic and mood altering pharmaceuticals, a Russian novel of behavioral plans. Nothing seems to work.

At the start of seventh grade, Michael was accepted to an accelerated program for highly gifted math and science students. His IQ is off the charts. When he’s in a good mood, he will gladly bend your ear on subjects ranging from Greek mythology to the differences between Einsteinian and Newtonian physics to Doctor Who. He’s in a good mood most of the time. But when he’s not, watch out. And it’s impossible to predict what will set him off.

Several weeks into his new junior high school, Michael began exhibiting increasingly odd and threatening behaviors at school. We decided to transfer him to the district’s most restrictive behavioral program, a contained school environment where children who can’t function in normal classrooms can access their right to free public babysitting from 7:30-1:50 Monday through Friday until they turn 18.

The morning of the pants incident, Michael continued to argue with me on the drive. He would occasionally apologize and seem remorseful. Right before we turned into his school parking lot, he said, “Look, Mom, I’m really sorry. Can I have video games back today?”

“No way,” I told him. “You cannot act the way you acted this morning and think you can get your electronic privileges back that quickly.”

His face turned cold, and his eyes were full of calculated rage. “Then I’m going to kill myself,” he said. “I’m going to jump out of this car right now and kill myself.”

That was it. After the knife incident, I told him that if he ever said those words again, I would take him straight to the mental hospital, no ifs, ands, or buts. I did not respond, except to pull the car into the opposite lane, turning left instead of right.

“Where are you taking me?” he said, suddenly worried. “Where are we going?”

“You know where we are going,” I replied.

“No! You can’t do that to me! You’re sending me to hell! You’re sending me straight to hell!”

I pulled up in front of the hospital, frantically waiving for one of the clinicians who happened to be standing outside. “Call the police,” I said. “Hurry.”

Michael was in a full-blown fit by then, screaming and hitting. I hugged him close so he couldn’t escape from the car. He bit me several times and repeatedly jabbed his elbows into my rib cage. I’m still stronger than he is, but I won’t be for much longer.

The police came quickly and carried my son screaming and kicking into the bowels of the hospital. I started to shake, and tears filled my eyes as I filled out the paperwork—“Were there any difficulties with....at what age did your child....were there any problems with...has your child ever experienced...does your child have....”

At least we have health insurance now. I recently accepted a position with a local college, giving up my freelance career because when you have a kid like this, you need benefits. You’ll do anything for benefits. No individual insurance plan will cover this kind of thing.

For days, my son insisted that I was lying—that I made the whole thing up so that I could get rid of him. The first day, when I called to check up on him, he said, “I hate you. And I’m going to get my revenge as soon as I get out of here.”

By day three, he was my calm, sweet boy again, all apologies and promises to get better. I’ve heard those promises for years. I don’t believe them anymore.

On the intake form, under the question, “What are your expectations for treatment?” I wrote, “I need help.”

And I do. This problem is too big for me to handle on my own. Sometimes there are no good options. So you just pray for grace and trust that in hindsight, it will all make sense.

I am sharing this story because I am Adam Lanza’s mother. I am Dylan Klebold’s and Eric Harris’s mother. I am Jason Holmes’s mother. I am Jared Loughner’s mother. I am Seung-Hui Cho’s mother. And these boys—and their mothers—need help. In the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.

According to Mother Jones, since 1982, 61 mass murders involving firearms have occurred throughout the country. (A Guide to Mass Shootings in America | Mother Jones (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map)). Of these, 43 of the killers were white males, and only one was a woman. Mother Jones focused on whether the killers obtained their guns legally (most did). But this highly visible sign of mental illness should lead us to consider how many people in the U.S. live in fear, like I do.

When I asked my son’s social worker about my options, he said that the only thing I could do was to get Michael charged with a crime. “If he’s back in the system, they’ll create a paper trail,” he said. “That’s the only way you’re ever going to get anything done. No one will pay attention to you unless you’ve got charges.”

I don’t believe my son belongs in jail. The chaotic environment exacerbates Michael’s sensitivity to sensory stimuli and doesn’t deal with the underlying pathology. But it seems like the United States is using prison as the solution of choice for mentally ill people. According to Human Rights Watch, the number of mentally ill inmates in U.S. prisons quadrupled from 2000 to 2006, and it continues to rise—in fact, the rate of inmate mental illness is five times greater (56 percent) than in the non-incarcerated population. (U.S.: Number of Mentally Ill in Prisons Quadrupled | Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/09/05/us-number-mentally-ill-prisons-quadrupled))

With state-run treatment centers and hospitals shuttered, prison is now the last resort for the mentally ill—Rikers Island, the LA County Jail, and Cook County Jail in Illinois housed the nation’s largest treatment centers in 2011 (Nation's Jails Struggle With Mentally Ill Prisoners : NPR (http://www.npr.org/2011/09/04/140167676/nations-jails-struggle-with-mentally-ill-prisoners))

No one wants to send a 13-year old genius who loves Harry Potter and his snuggle animal collection to jail. But our society, with its stigma on mental illness and its broken healthcare system, does not provide us with other options. Then another tortured soul shoots up a fast food restaurant. A mall. A kindergarten classroom. And we wring our hands and say, “Something must be done.”

I agree that something must be done. It’s time for a meaningful, nation-wide conversation about mental health. That’s the only way our nation can ever truly heal.

God help me. God help Michael. God help us all.

Just wanted to repost what Noir posted earlier in case it was missed. It's not long, and it's an excellent read.

[Tapioca]

Seeing the faces of those kids is sad, but I have no faith in the United States to do the right thing and take serious measures to control firearms. If an incident like this can't move people to do the right thing, then nothing will.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Hondaracer]

IMO there is no way to "control" 300 million guns.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Jason00S2000]

The Anarchist Soccer Mom sounds like a bitch.

There is not enough to tell you WHY the kid acts that way towards his mom. I bet there's no father in the picture.

[GLOW]

IMO there is no way to "control" 300 million guns.
Posted via RS Mobile

that's what i'm thinking...unless you some how limit ammunition availability and the materials to create it?

[Graeme S]

The biggest problem here is the general opposition in the US to federal laws and federal regulation. As long as each state is allowed to make its own completely and totally independent laws, there will be no solution. It's all well and good to ban certain types of weapons or require licensing for weapons in one state, but if I can hop across the state line and get a Saturday night special, what's the point at all?

[jlo mein]

I'm sure everyone here knows that Obama has been quietly mentioning renewing the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) for several months now. Rumours are coming up that it's the likely gun control method he will propose in the coming weeks.

The AWB was a feel good law introduced by the Clinton administration in 1994. It ran for a predetermined 10 years until 2004. The AWB did not stop the Columbine shooting in 1999. Many other public shootings happened during thistime.


The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the "assault weapon" ban and other gun control attempts, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban



Masaad Ayoob is a writer and former law enforcement officer. He appeared on the Today Show after the Columbine shooting and has been used as an expert witness in many criminal trials. Here's his take on the Conneticut massacre.


By Massad Ayoob
Saturday, December 15th, 2012

The atrocity at the Connecticut elementary school will not be the last such horror, nor was it the first or even the worst. Go back to the year 1764, in what is now Franklin County, Pennsylvania. The first: during Pontiac’s Rebellion in the wake of the French and Indian War, four “warriors” entered a schoolhouse and slaughtered the headmaster and some ten children. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac...chool_massacre . The worst: in 1927, a crazed monster beat his wife to death, then triggered a bombing in an elementary school in Bath, Michigan, killing some 38 kids and several adults. Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster) .


I’ll repeat what I said in the Wall Street Journal op-ed section and on theToday show in 1999, after the Columbine High School atrocity: if we simply prepared teachers to handle this type of crisis the way we teach them to handle fires and medical emergencies, the death toll would drop dramatically. We don’t hear of mass deaths of children in school fires these days: fire drills have long since been commonplace, led by trained school staff, not to mention sprinkler systems and smoke alarms and strategically placed fire extinguishers that can nip a blaze in the bud while firefighters are en route. In the past, if someone “dropped dead,” people would cry and wring their hands and wail, “When will the ambulance get here?” Today, almost every responsible adult knows CPR; most schools have easily-operated Automatic Electronic Defibrillators readily accessible; and a heart attack victim’s chance of surviving until the paramedics arrive to take over is now far greater.

The same principle works for defending against mass murders…it just doesn’t work HERE, because it is politically incorrect to employ it HERE. After the Ma’alot massacre in 1974, Israel instituted a policy in which volunteer school personnel, parents, and grandparents received special training from the civil guard, and were seeded throughout the schools armed with discreetly concealed 9mm semiautomatic pistols. Since that time, there has been no successful mass murder at an Israeli school, and every attempt at such has been quickly shortstopped by the good guys’ gunfire, with minimal casualties among the innocent. Similar programs are in place in Peru and the Phillippines, with similarly successful results.

Some people see the logic in the Israeli approach. Dave Workman does, as seen here: http://www.examiner.com/article/obam...id=db_articles. Ann Coulter does, as seen here: http://www.thewrap.com/media/column-...rry-laws-69361 .

Unfortunately, in this country, logic has been buried under political correctness. Those in power whose ego is invested in brie et Chablis values that include scorn for the peasantry they accuse of “clinging to guns and Bibles” will never see that logic. Children will continue to die in gun-free zones hunting preserves for psychopathic murderers, and the cowardly murderers will continue to surrender or kill themselves as soon as armed good guys show up…far too late.


http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/MassadAyoob/2012/12/15/against-monsters/

[drunkrussian]

banning guns is ok with me, i am not a big supporter of guns personally nor will it affect me. Haven't really thought it through though to be honest.

What i do care more about is illegal weapons control, regulation and prevention and help for at risk communities. Since the Afghanistan war started around 2.5k US troops have died. In that same period of time roughly 4.5k people were murdered in chicago, mostly black and mostly via illegal weapons. That's a single city, not a state, not the entire United States army, not a whole country.

the connecticut incident is unique and tragic and something should be looked at to prevent it from happening in the future. But 4.5k is a hell of a lot of people. It should be taken seriously.

[Graeme S]

I'm curious how the pro-gun crowd here would react to the restriction of magazine sizes and full-auto firing weapons?

Even in a society where people insist they have a right to defend themselves, I don't see why a magazine of...let's say greater than 10 rounds would be necessary, nor why they would have to be on full auto. And by restriction I mean banning them except for police/military use. And that would include a ban on conversion units or "spare parts" to repair existing weapons.

[jlo mein]

I'm curious how the pro-gun crowd here would react to the restriction of magazine sizes and full-auto firing weapons?

Even in a society where people insist they have a right to defend themselves, I don't see why a magazine of...let's say greater than 10 rounds would be necessary, nor why they would have to be on full auto. And by restriction I mean banning them except for police/military use. And that would include a ban on conversion units or "spare parts" to repair existing weapons.

Once again misinformation. Everyone believes fully automatic weapons are legal in America and causing destruction.

No private American citizen can own a fully automatic firearm manufactured after 1986. There are approximately 190,000 registered fully automatic firearms in private ownership today, compared to an estimated 300 million firearms total in private ownership.

The process to acquire and own full auto firearms is much more strict, which includes $200 tax stamp fees, full criminal and mental background checks by the ATF, and a waiting period of 180 days. The cost of acquiring one is extremely high due to the low supply (only pre 1986 existing guns allowed).

Since 1986, I have only found two examples of registered full auto firearms being used in a crime, neither in a psychopath shooting massacre.

Whenever the media reports an assault rifle being used in a shooting: IT IS NOT A FULLY AUTOMATIC FIREARM. Every case I have heard of the media using the term "assault rifle", it has been a semi-automatic rifle no different in actual rate of fire than an ordinary hunting rifle.


You also mention magazine restrictions. First, you suggest an arbitrary number of 10 rounds should be the legal limit for American self defense. Have you been in an American self defense shooting? Have you consulted an expert in American self defense shootings who has studied cases? I can post many documented law enforcement and private citizen shootings where the attacker did not stop even after being shot 10 times.

I won't even answer that for you, I'll give you what you want: Magazine capacity restrictions are already in place in Canada and California. Guess what? It's done nothing to reduce violent crime in California, and I can give you a page here specifically about only Canadian school shootings where magazine restrictions did not help anyone. This is just Canada and doesn't even include all violent crimes, just schools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Canada

"Feel good" gun control laws are not effective as concluded by studies I already posted earlier. Please read about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

[Graeme S]

I realize and acknowledge the points that you are making, including and especially the fact that Assault Rifle != automatic. However, it's my understanding that while automatic weapons themselves are illegal, that the parts which would allow them to be modified from semi- to fully-automatic are not.

[trollface]

I'm curious how the pro-gun crowd here would react to the restriction of magazine sizes and full-auto firing weapons?


There already is one...

We can't own FA unless they were grand fathered, even then you can't use it. Our mags are limited to 5 for rifles (exclude rimfire) and 10 for pistols.

[Graeme S]

Interesting and good to know.

Is it guns sold with those magazines that are illegal, or the mags themselves? Also, are you Canadian or American? Because I'm referring to American laws here, not Canadian ones.

[jlo mein]

I realize and acknowledge the points that you are making, including and especially the fact that Assault Rifle != automatic. However, it's my understanding that while automatic weapons themselves are illegal, that the parts which would allow them to be modified from semi- to fully-automatic are not.

You are posting misinformation. American citizens do not have access to supplies of parts designed to modify semi auto firearms to fully automatic. They are restricted to law enforcement/military only.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080708031834AA6syRq

[StylinRed]

I won't even answer that for you, I'll give you what you want: Magazine capacity restrictions are already in place in Canada and California. Guess what? It's done nothing to reduce violent crime in California, and I can give you a page here specifically about only Canadian school shootings where magazine restrictions did not help anyone. This is just Canada and doesn't even include all violent crimes, just schools.

School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Canada)


how do those instances of violence equate to magazine restrictions being ineffective?

if drawing arbitrary lines in the sand, to try and cut down gun violence, proves pointless then why not just cut guns out of the picture entirely? because getting your panties in a bunch is too great a call to curb/cut down mass murders?

[Hondaracer]

an SKS can be modded to full auto with a vice and some pliers, where there's a will theres a way

as Jlo said magazine restrictions are already in place. However, it's similar to the argument of "controlling" X amount of guns

while there is a ban on large magazines, soooooo many huge banana mag's are still in existance that it would be relatively easy to get your hands on high volume magazines, legal or not

the real problem in enforcing any sort of control are simply the unbelievable number of firearms and accessories floating around the world and US specifically

[trollface]

I realize and acknowledge the points that you are making, including and especially the fact that Assault Rifle != automatic. However, it's my understanding that while automatic weapons themselves are illegal, that the parts which would allow them to be modified from semi- to fully-automatic are not.

You can't buy parts off the shelf to make a gun FA. This is not like putting new wheels on a car, most of the time the design of the weapon is different. The RCMP bans the import of any firearm that can be made into an automatic for that very reason you stated.

Hondaracer:
Lol, can you really do that to an SKS? They're so cheap to buy here $150 bucks.

[Hondaracer]

There already is one...

We can't own FA unless they were grand fathered, even then you can't use it. Our mags are limited to 5 for rifles (exclude rimfire) and 10 for pistols.

according to my buddie's dad who's kind of a gun nut and an ultra-conservative, there are only 6 people in the whole of Canada who still have the fully auto grandfathered rule, and i belive all of them are over 65, once they die no one will have their weapons

[trollface]

according to my buddie's dad who's kind of a gun nut and an ultra-conservative, there are only 6 people in the whole of Canada who still have the fully auto grandfathered rule, and i belive all of them are over 65, once they die no one will have their weapons

I don't think so? FA just means prohibited class. That class also includes all the stuff that is scary looking from ww2 or small pistols. I ran into someone that had the license and owns an FN FAL in Richmond. Also, many gunsmiths and shops have that license since shops and xfere them to other shops with the license. There is a shop in Van that has a few WW2 Prohibs. So that's 2/6 ppl within 15km. I think there are many more.

[Yodamaster]

Once again misinformation. Everyone believes fully automatic weapons are legal in America and causing destruction.

No private American citizen can own a fully automatic firearm manufactured after 1986. There are approximately 190,000 registered fully automatic firearms in private ownership today, compared to an estimated 300 million firearms total in private ownership.

The process to acquire and own full auto firearms is much more strict, which includes $200 tax stamp fees, full criminal and mental background checks by the ATF, and a waiting period of 180 days. The cost of acquiring one is extremely high due to the low supply (only pre 1986 existing guns allowed).

Since 1986, I have only found two examples of registered full auto firearms being used in a crime, neither in a psychopath shooting massacre.

Whenever the media reports an assault rifle being used in a shooting: IT IS NOT A FULLY AUTOMATIC FIREARM. Every case I have heard of the media using the term "assault rifle", it has been a semi-automatic rifle no different in actual rate of fire than an ordinary hunting rifle.


You also mention magazine restrictions. First, you suggest an arbitrary number of 10 rounds should be the legal limit for American self defense. Have you been in an American self defense shooting? Have you consulted an expert in American self defense shootings who has studied cases? I can post many documented law enforcement and private citizen shootings where the attacker did not stop even after being shot 10 times.

I won't even answer that for you, I'll give you what you want: Magazine capacity restrictions are already in place in Canada and California. Guess what? It's done nothing to reduce violent crime in California, and I can give you a page here specifically about only Canadian school shootings where magazine restrictions did not help anyone. This is just Canada and doesn't even include all violent crimes, just schools.

School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Canada)

"Feel good" gun control laws are not effective as concluded by studies I already posted earlier. Please read about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

Certain states still allow brand new automatic firearms to be purchased by citizens with a class three license.

[Hondaracer]

I don't think so? FA just means prohibited class. That class also includes all the stuff that is scary looking from ww2 or small pistols. I ran into someone that had the license and owns an FN FAL in Richmond. Also, many gunsmiths and shops have that license since shops and xfere them to other shops with the license. There is a shop in Van that has a few WW2 Prohibs. So that's 2/6 ppl within 15km. I think there are many more.

thought FA weapons fell outside of restricted category?

[trollface]

thought FA weapons fell outside of restricted category?

Prohibited. It was grandfathered. You can get a prob on your license if someone in your family left the prohib to you after they passed. If you don't, you can never get it. If you let that license expire, they won't renew it and you have to turn the prohib over to the rcmp. To sum it up, what out there now is the only ones out there. The ppl that have it now, are the only ppl that will have them unless they are passed down or traded among ppl with the prohib on their license.

I believe you cannot get an ATT for those weapons also. It's literally a paper weight that shoots bullets.

There are three classes:

Non-rest.
Rest.
Prohib.

[Hondaracer]

yea meant prohib sorry, hmm interesting, gotta be rich enough to build your own indoor range for em lol

[jlo mein]

Certain states still allow brand new automatic firearms to be purchased by citizens with a class three license.

Class III license is for gun dealers only. A private citizen without a gun dealer business cannot get a Class III license.

Do not spread misinformation. A private citizen in America cannot acquire a fully automatic firearm manufactured after 1986. Since 1986 I have only found two documented cases of registered full auto firearms being used in crimes, neither in a school shooting massacre.

Please reference the American National Firearms Act.


For civilian possession, all machineguns must have been manufactured and registered with the ATF prior to May 19, 1986 to be transferable between citizens. These machinegun prices have drastically escalated in value, especially items like registered sears and conversion-kits. Only a Class-II manufacturer (a FFL holder licensed to manufacture firearms or Type-07 license that has paid a Special Occupational Tax Stamp or SOT) could manufacture machineguns after that date, and they can only be sold to Government, law-enforcement, and military entities. Transfer can only be done to other SOT FFL-holders, and such FFL-holders must have a “demonstration letter” from a respective Government agency to receive such machineguns. Falsification and/or misuse of the “demo-letter” process can and has resulted in long jail sentences and felony convictions for violators.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act

[StylinRed]

Piers Morgan going all out again tonight against guns

pointing out how australia/uk havent had shcool shootings since they've put bans in place

[trollface]

It's actually disgustingly hard to get your hands on an fa in USA.
Posted via RS Mobile

[jlo mein]

Piers Morgan going all out again tonight against guns

pointing out how australia/uk havent had shcool shootings since they've put bans in place

Really Piers Morgan? The more I watch this guy the more I believe he is unwilling to have an honest debate where he allows others on his show to debate the other side without his intervention. All I see him do is interrupt his guests.

I searched for 30 seconds and found a shooting massacre that happened in the UK AFTER their harsh gun control was implemented:

Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings)

[Graeme S]

The question here is not "do they happen with restrictive gun laws", which you seem to be trying to answer Jlo. The question here is "do more restrictive gun laws harm citizens more than they protect citizens"

As we've said before, anyone who has the will can do it. The salient point here is whether or not making these things more challenging to acquire would make it more challenging for these determined people to complete.

You focus on the 'registered firearms' aspect of what I am discussing. Unless I'm mistaken, stolen guns are not considered 'registered' once they have been reported missing. I am also still curious about your opinion on magazine size restrictions (in the US, not here), which I think you glossed over in my previous questions.

[CorneringArtist]

Yes, it's a joke, and not even close to a possible solution, but with all the discussion on gun control, this clip came to mind. Personally, I'm leaning towards mental health screenings as part of the firearm licensing process, with re-checks every three years. However, I'm also not opposed to further restrictions of certain firearms, but as discussed so far, what to restrict is incredibly subjective.

Chris Rock on Gun Control - YouTube

[Graeme S]

Also, separate point and something I remember hearing about when I was talking with a friend of mine.

While you cannot *apply* for prohibited, a friend of mine once mentioned that he purchased a gun that he had a hunch would later be on the prohibited list. He said (and again, I'm relaying information here) "Once a gun you already own is on the prohibited list, you basically get grandfathered in to a prohibited license."

So if what he's saying is true...

[trollface]

Also, separate point and something I remember hearing about when I was talking with a friend of mine.

While you cannot *apply* for prohibited, a friend of mine once mentioned that he purchased a gun that he had a hunch would later be on the prohibited list. He said (and again, I'm relaying information here) "Once a gun you already own is on the prohibited list, you basically get grandfathered in to a prohibited license."

So if what he's saying is true...

Wishful thinking. This has happened before. If you google Norinco T97 you'll see. It was a non-rest when sold. A bunch of people go them and shortly after the RCMP said it was Prohib. Knock knock, who's there? RCMP.

[StylinRed]

Really Piers Morgan? The more I watch this guy the more I believe he is unwilling to have an honest debate where he allows others on his show to debate the other side without his intervention. All I see him do is interrupt his guests.

I searched for 30 seconds and found a shooting massacre that happened in the UK AFTER their harsh gun control was implemented:

Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings)

he made a point to say school shootings

[rsx]

I know I'm getting flak for my idea regarding responsible parenthood.

But as you can see, Obama is calling for a ban on AR's. This is absolutely futile. A person who can't get his hands on an AR will just find a shotgun/hunting rifle/pistol to substitute. In any case, all AR's are semi-auto's anyway. They're pretty much hunting rifles, not mil spec'd at all. You can buy bump fire stocks for "full auto" I suppose, but you can buy semi-auto shotguns and that's as deadly.

It's either ban guns outright, or find the root problem of why people are using them to do harm and address it.

[RacingMetro92]

Hey 2damaxmr2,

Instead of failing people who have a stance that remotely constitutes banning or controlling guns, why don't you post an opinion on it? By failing others and not backing up your reasons why, it makes you look like a jackass.

If you feel so strongly, and can only respond by failing then what the hell is your problem with the gun control then? It may not be plausible, but steps do need to be taken to figure out why events like these happen be it mental problems with the shooters or the 300 million guns+ out there in America.

So you believe that teachers should have had a gun in their classrooms, thereby avoiding this tragedy? Your silence seems to back that up.

[Hondaracer]

a ban on AR's is all cosmetic

and what a fucking joke the media is, tonight on "Entertainment tonight" :roll eyes: the main host led with the shooting story, his opening line?

"Among the guns found was a Glock 17, a "high powered pistol used for hunting large game"

uhg..

[rsx]

a ban on AR's is all cosmetic

and what a fucking joke the media is, tonight on "Entertainment tonight" :roll eyes: the main host led with the shooting story, his opening line?

"Among the guns found was a Glock 17, a "high powered pistol used for hunting large game"

uhg..

WTF. Isn't a glock17 9mm??

[trollface]

a ban on AR's is all cosmetic

and what a fucking joke the media is, tonight on "Entertainment tonight" :roll eyes: the main host led with the shooting story, his opening line?

"Among the guns found was a Glock 17, a "high powered pistol used for hunting large game"

uhg..

Sigh. The sad thing is people will go around repeating this and spreading false info. For anyone who does not know. That's a common 9mm pistol, one of the smaller hand gun calibres. That thing is not dropping any big game unless the bear eats the bullet and it gets lodged in it's airway and chokes to death.

[Manic!]

You are posting misinformation. American citizens do not have access to supplies of parts designed to modify semi auto firearms to fully automatic. They are restricted to law enforcement/military only.

Converting a gun into full automatic? - Yahoo! Answers (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080708031834AA6syRq)

So whats this: Hellfire trigger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellfire_trigger) and the AK-57 can be modded to full auto in couple of minutes.

[trollface]

So whats this: Hellfire trigger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellfire_trigger) and the AK-57 can be modded to full auto in couple of minutes.

That's still not a full auto. One press = mag dump = FA.
That thing you're describing is closer to a bumpfire/slide fire stock. It still requires you to depress the trigger to fire 1 round. You can loop your thumb around the belt holes in ur jeans and achieve the same thing.

[Manic!]

That's still not a full auto. One press = mag dump = FA.
That thing you're describing is closer to a bumpfire/slide fire stock. It still requires you to depress the trigger to fire 1 round. You can loop your thumb around the belt holes in ur jeans and achieve the same thing.

You can mod a AK-47 for ful auto in minutes. I used a full auto M-16 when I was in Vegas.

[trollface]

You can mod a AK-47 for ful auto in minutes. I used a full auto M-16 when I was in Vegas.

I'm referring to the trigger you linked. What does the M16 have to do with a select fire Ak?

[SkinnyPupp]

Hey 2damaxmr2,

Instead of failing people who have a stance that remotely constitutes banning or controlling guns, why don't you post an opinion on it? By failing others and not backing up your reasons why, it makes you look like a jackass.

If you feel so strongly, and can only respond by failing then what the hell is your problem with the gun control then? It may not be plausible, but steps do need to be taken to figure out why events like these happen be it mental problems with the shooters or the 300 million guns+ out there in America.

So you believe that teachers should have had a gun in their classrooms, thereby avoiding this tragedy? Your silence seems to back that up.
He has had the function disabled for failstalking

[Bonjour43MA]

Here are some facts for those that are too lazy to research and only believe in what the media tells you:

In Canada:
- there are no automatic rifles or "assault rifles" available to be purchased
- you can't buy conversion kits legally to modify semi-autos to full-autos
- a person needs to be licensed (long process that takes 1.5~6 months, done by the RCMP) before buying even a hunting rifle
- there's a restriction on pistol magazines to hold only 10 rounds
- there's a restriction on semi-auto(one shot per trigger pull) magazines to hold only 5 rounds
- an AR-15 is "restricted", meaning you can only use it at the range, but many people have it as it is a popular target/competition shooting rifle
- there's a long list of rifles that are prohibited (can't buy them) STRICTLY because of the way they LOOK, for example, the AK47. (this makes little sense - why would one rifle be "more deadly" than the other, when both shoot the same ammo and function identically?)
- you cannot buy ammo without a license
- doing any of the following will result in the gun owner being charged under the CRIMINAL CODE: forgetting to renew your license when it expires, not storing your guns properly at home, not having the right paperwork when you transport your restricted pistols/rifles, and many more. Gun owners are punished and treated as potential criminals simply by owning these mechanical devices.

Canada has a pretty tight gun control system in place already, so people need to chill out and stop reacting as if gun owners are a bunch of lunatics , just waiting for the right time to snap and kill people. Last I checked, there are 2 million license holders in Canada, and over 10 million guns all over the country. We don't have anywhere near the amount of shootings as they do in the states.

This is a social issue, not an object/tool issue. However, I do support some form of restriction on who can, and what can be bought/used (full auto is fun, but I'm ok with not having it available to civilians). Our current system is ok and there's no need to make it anymore convoluted or "tougher". Some tweaks here and there are needed, though (I acutally want to see that it is mandatory for a private seller to confirm the buyer's license info is legitimate before selling the non-restricted rifles. Right now it is optional/within reasonable grounds to believe that the info is true. I think this needs to be mandatory.)

It gets a lot more complicated in the states because of their legal system (federal vs state laws, etc), culture, and social issues. Banning one MODEL of a firearm because of its common use in tragic incidents is purely a political and emotional move, NOT something that will make a difference in saving lives and preventing potential crimes.

At the end of the day, a gun is a gun, banning/restricting them based on media exposure or cosmetic reasons is simply asinine. An "evil looking" AR-15 is no more lethal than your grandpa's 1950 Russian SKS rifle - both are semi-auto, both hold 5 rounds, both shoot standard issue ammo, and both could be used by good OR bad people.

[SkinnyPupp]

- there's a long list of rifles that are prohibited (can't buy them) STRICTLY because of the way they LOOK, for example, the AK47. (this makes little sense - why would one rifle be "more deadly" than the other, when both shoot the same ammo and functions identically?)

So you're saying that an AK47 is identical to every other rifle, except the way it looks?

Come on

It is more deadly, that's why it has been used so widely by so many countries over the years.

[Lomac]

So you're saying that an AK47 is identical to every other rifle, except the way it looks?

Come on

It is more deadly, that's why it has been used so widely by so many countries over the years.

The AK47 shoots an 7.62×39mm, which is, for all intents and purposes, the same as the .30-30... which is a deer hunting round that licenced hunters throughout the world use. The only main difference between an AK47 and a basic hunting rifle is the full auto option.

The reason why it's so commonly used by countries over the world is because it's highly reliable and dirt cheap to produce, not because of it's deadliness. Hell, a single bullet through a body before it starts tumbling causes "relatively" minor injuries.

[Bonjour43MA]

So you're saying that an AK47 is identical to every other rifle, except the way it looks?

Come on

It is more deadly, that's why it has been used so widely by so many countries over the years.

Case in point. Thanks for quoting me and stating what you just said. A perfect example of what I was talking about where people believe that a certain type of gun is "deadlier" than the other.

The AK is popular because it is a simple design that is easy to clean and use, is cheap to make, and low maintenance. Yes, it IS identical to other rifles that shoot the same ammo (7.62x39mm) and perform the same function, but with obvious mechanical differences which resulted in the way it looks.

Like the Civic from years past, there's a shit load of them because of price points and what you get in return - it doesn't run faster than a Corolla; it doesn't take more passenger than a Sentra, and it doesn't do anything that any other 4 dr sedan can't do. You can think of the AK as the Civic in the firearms community.

Tell me, with facts, how the AK is "more deadly" than other rifles that shoot the same 7.62x39mm rounds? I got my pen and paper ready.

Higher cycling rate? Nope
Shoots bigger rounds? Nope
More accurate? Nope
Looks scarier because it's what the bad guys use in movies and video games? Ding Ding!

[rsx]

So you're saying that an AK47 is identical to every other rifle, except the way it looks?

Come on

It is more deadly, that's why it has been used so widely by so many countries over the years.

AK47's are used by so many countries for military operations / insurgency because it's design is very efficient; cheap to produce, ease of use (cleaning and firing), and durability; it's not more deadly, it's just an easily manufactured gun that doesn't break often.

[trollface]

So you're saying that an AK47 is identical to every other rifle, except the way it looks?

Come on

It is more deadly, that's why it has been used so widely by so many countries over the years.

It shoots the same round as a $150 dollar SKS. It's well represented in conflicts because of how many were made, their reliability and simplicity and full auto (sum). You want to arm your forces with a weapon that is realiable, plenty of ammo sources and a large cache of parts.

If you buy an AK from one of the MANY manufactures in the US for $600, it's not deadlier than the $150 dollar dirty russian SKS I can buy tomm.

Beaten by poster above.

[Bonjour43MA]

I also want to point out that the only reason I'm talking about guns in this thread is because of the amount of misinformation, misconception, and emotional response not based on facts that are being spewed out all over the place on these mechanical devices.

What we should be talking about instead, is what can be done to prevent the next crazy PERSON from getting to the point where they simply have no other way to resolve their issues other than killing others?

[rsx]

Any caliber of gun is fucking deadly.

Look at all the mods you can do to a Ruger 10/22. It's a .22LR, and there's an insane amount of mods you can do to it, legally. You can make it look like as intimidating as any gun out there. Hell, Colt makes .22LR's with a m4 carbine body.

[stewie]

-edit-

everything i wrote just got said from the past 6 people ahead of me

[MindBomber]

At the end of the day, a gun is a gun, banning/restricting them based on media exposure or cosmetic reasons is simply asinine. An "evil looking" AR-15 is no more lethal than your grandpa's 1950 Russian SKS rifle - both are semi-auto, both hold 5 rounds, both shoot standard issue ammo, and both could be used by good OR bad people.

I'd like to focus on this passage, but first I'll address that larger body of your text. I've not noted any especially anti-firearms posts within this thread, or ever within the greater context of revscene, only posts of by people with various degrees of experience with the subject and a lot of pointed criticisms of the American culture surrounding it. Even a proponent of CCW permits, would have to agree, a greater proportion of gun owners in America and not responsible compared with Canada. Moving along..

The SKS compared to the AK-47 - just my experience/knowledge which is not flawless by any means.

-the SKS was designed to be a rifle with semi-auto capability.
-the AK-47 was designed to be a machine gun with full or semi-auto capability.

-the SKS is designed to hold a fixed 10 round magazine.
-the AK-47 is designed to hold a removable 30-75 round magazine.

- the SKS is designed to be accurate and has tight tolerances.
- the AK-47 is designed to be reliable and has very wide tolerances.

- the SKS uses a two-piece piston.
- the AK-47 uses a one-piece piston.

- the SKS and AK-47 both use 7.62 x 39mm ammo.

Yes, yes, yes, as used by a legal gun owner, none of this really matters too much. Unfortunately, a person who has avoided the type of contact with police that would have them prohibited from legally purchasing a gun can still purchase on with illegal intentions (like we see in America, time and time again). While the SKS is fundamentally a rifle, the AK-47 is fundamentally an assault weapon, and that's why it's the gun universally chosen by poor/cheap armies the world over. The SKS can be converted to full-auto and made to accept higher capacity magazines, but it won't stand up to that type of use well. The AK-47 was born and bred for full auto uses, so although they're not set up in that configuration for sale in America, if someone were to convert one, they would have a weapon that thrives under spray-and-pray conditions. So, when you get down to brass tax - there really is a big difference between the two guns in the wrong hands, not just aesthetic differences.

Edit:
Bonjour, I see you've written above, the SKS and AK-47 are equally accurate? I've never shot an AK, nor do I have any desire to, so I have no point of hands on comparison, but I've always understood the AK-47 to be fundamentally less accurate than the SKS?

[trollface]

Just want to say that the Ak family is prohibited in Canada. You CANNOT buy it. Period. In auto form or not.

[rsx]

I'd like to focus on this passage, but first I'll address that larger body of your text. I've not noted any especially anti-firearms posts within this thread, or ever within the greater context of revscene, only posts of by people with various degrees of experience with the subject and a lot of pointed criticisms of the American culture surrounding it. Even a proponent of CCW permits, would have to agree, a greater proportion of gun owners in America and not responsible compared with Canada. Moving along..

The SKS compared to the AK-47 - just my experience/knowledge which is not flawless by any means.

-the SKS was designed to be a rifle with semi-auto capability.
-the AK-47 was designed to be a machine gun with full or semi-auto capability.

-the SKS is designed to hold a fixed 10 round magazine.
-the AK-47 is designed to hold a removable 30-75 round magazine.

- the SKS is designed to be accurate and has tight tolerances.
- the AK-47 is designed to be reliable and has very wide tolerances.

- the SKS uses a two-piece piston.
- the AK-47 uses a one-piece piston.

- the SKS and AK-47 both use 7.62 x 39mm ammo.

Yes, yes, yes, as used by a legal gun owner, none of this really matters too much. Unfortunately, a person who has avoided the type of contact with police that would have them prohibited from obtaining a PAL or RPAL can legally purchase a gun with illegal intentions (like we see in America, time and time again). While the SKS is fundamentally a rifle, the AK-47 is fundamentally an assault weapon, and that's why it's the gun universally chosen by poor/cheap armies the world over. The SKS can be converted to full-auto and made to accept higher capacity magazines, but it won't stand up to that type of use well. The AK-47 was born and bred for full auto uses, so although they're not set up in that configuration for sale in Canada, if someone were to convert one, they would have a weapon that thrives under spray-and-pray conditions. So, when you get down to brass tax - there really is a big difference between the two guns in the wrong hands, not just aesthetic differences.

Edit:
Bonjour, I see you've written above, the SKS and AK-47 are equally accurate? I've never shot an AK, nor do I have any desire to, so I have no point of hands on comparison, but I've always understood the AK-47 to be fundamentally less accurate than the SKS?

I would agree that the AK has ergonomics and design for more of an assault capacity and the SKS is more of a long rifle, but at the end of the day, there are always mods you can do. If the government takes away one gun, a company will design mods to upgrade another gun to take its place.

A quick youtube search yielded an insane SKS Bullpup stock kit.
SKS Rifle Bullpup Stock Kit Conversion - YouTube

[Bonjour43MA]

Nope, I said that the AK is not as accurate as others that shoot the same rounds. There's the SKS-D which takes AK mags that you can actually buy in Canada but those are rare to find these days - they are not full-auto though. The CZ 858, another popular 7.62x39 rifle in Canada, is a semi-auto version of the full-auto vz58. Not as popular as the AK but widely used as well. We can talk guns if you want, but I'm sure this is not the thread to do it. Most people don't care enough to understand in details to begin with.

Also, as you said, to legal gun owners in Canada, none of the difference you listed matters. See, this is where people get mixed up when talking about gun control - what exactly is being controlled? If you're trying to prevent criminals from getting access to certain guns, then targeting legal owners does nothing at all since, as you mentioned, criminals have their own channels of arms supply.

If we're trying to control or prevent the "crazies" from getting guns, then the issue is mental health and the abundance of (or lack of) a support system for those that need it. That is not to say that having some form of gun control has no value - it does. As I mentioned, we can do as much as we can do to screen out those potentially unstable people from having lethal weapons, but there will always be times where a determined individual will obtain the tool they need to inflict the maximum amount of damage, guns or not.

I haven't been keeping up with the news on this incident lately - have they figured out the shooter's motive behind all this mess?

[jaguar604]

video is dated but is still relevant. it explains how firearms are categorized, operate, and how appearance doesn't matter. video is from california which has similar gun control laws to canada

What Is An "Assault Rifle"? - You've Probably Been Lied To - YouTube

[zx7rrrr]

Heres my theory from the info i collected.

-shooter had mild aspergers (autism spectrum) sociopathic personality. no sense of sympathy toward people.
-Mom and Dad just recently divorced. Went through Depression and anger towards parents
-Mom is his primary caregiver after divorce so he depends on her emotionally for support and care.
-eventually Mom spends more time with her kids at school than son.Mom is an avid gun collector.
-Son goes in a jelous angry rage finds her guns.
-Kills Mom then Kids then himself

I've worked as a support worker with kids and adults with autism/aspergers and i can see how this all makes sense. This is a mental illness and these people should be monitored and treated 24/7.

[BillyBishop]

You also mention magazine restrictions. First, you suggest an arbitrary number of 10 rounds should be the legal limit for American self defense. Have you been in an American self defense shooting? Have you consulted an expert in American self defense shootings who has studied cases? I can post many documented law enforcement and private citizen shootings where the attacker did not stop even after being shot 10 times.

Not that it's important, but I'm confused by your fixation on the number 10 even after you acknowledged that it was written arbitrarily.

Magazine capacity restrictions are already in place in Canada and California. Guess what? It's done nothing to reduce violent crime in California, and I can give you a page here specifically about only Canadian school shootings where magazine restrictions did not help anyone. This is just Canada and doesn't even include all violent crimes, just schools.

School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Canada)

You're doing it again -- what I mentioned in my other post in this thread. There is zero proof of causation between magazine restrictions and whatever you're referring to in that webpage you cited. Absolutely nil. I understand the incredible difficulty in attempting to prove such a thing; a tightly controlled experiment isn't at all feasible since we don't exactly have murderers and disposable lives in our arsenal. We thus rely on precise studies to supply empirical evidence, if it can even be construed as such.

[SkinnyPupp]

Case in point. Thanks for quoting me and stating what you just said. A perfect example of what I was talking about where people believe that a certain type of gun is "deadlier" than the other.

The AK is popular because it is a simple design that is easy to clean and use, is cheap to make, and low maintenance. Yes, it IS identical to other rifles that shoot the same ammo (7.62x39mm) and perform the same function, but with obvious mechanical differences which resulted in the way it looks.

Like the Civic from years past, there's a shit load of them because of price points and what you get in return - it doesn't run faster than a Corolla; it doesn't take more passenger than a Sentra, and it doesn't do anything that any other 4 dr sedan can't do. You can think of the AK as the Civic in the firearms community.

Tell me, with facts, how the AK is "more deadly" than other rifles that shoot the same 7.62x39mm rounds? I got my pen and paper ready.

Higher cycling rate? Nope
Shoots bigger rounds? Nope
More accurate? Nope
Looks scarier because it's what the bad guys use in movies and video games? Ding Ding!
I didn't think it was necessary to, and thankfully Mindbomber has taken care of the comparisons for me.

When comparing guns, you don't simply go "well they can both put a bullet in you,so they are exactly equal"

That would be like comparing a Ferrari with a Toyota and going "well they can both drive, so will be the same around a race track"

You listed the many reasons why the AK is so ubiquitous with many militaries around the world. Easy to use, easy to clean, easy to 'spray and pray'. You listed many of the advantages that all make it deadlier than other guns.

Yes, they can both put a bullet in people, but when one is so much easier to kill someone with, it becomes "a deadlier gun". Simply put, it is easier to kill someone with a rifle like an AK than it would be with many other rifles.

The guy who killed all those kids had shot each kid "more than two times". Would he have been able to do that so easily with a bolt action rifle? Maybe, or maybe it would have taken longer and he would have been captured. Or maybe he would have only shot each person once, and there would be survivors, who knows.

If a gun is built with the sole purpose of attacking humans, it has no business being in the hands of civilians. Or at least not with ammo within the same vicinity.

[jlo mein]

I'm done with this thread. I've posted more substantiated evidence and dedicated more time to research in this thread than anyone else. Required reading for this thread should be the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban and a history of school shootings since then. I believe I've posted enough to the masses of Revscene to sway those who are debating the issue. There are always those who will not be swayed. It never bothers me to have conflicting opinions with others, but it does bother me when they feed off of a sole source and preach it like a choir. I have read and listened to opinions on all aspects of this issue and I've come to my own beliefs of what is the root of the problem.

I truly hope we have inspired young Revscene members to dive deeper into the issue than watching 5 minutes on the TV news.

I only believe one truth more and more as time passes:

Sheep will be sheep, wolves will be wolves, and sheepdogs will be sheepdogs.

RIP to all the victims in this tragic event.

My last article post in this thread:


DECEMBER 16, 2012 4:00 P.M.
The Facts about Mass Shootings
It’s time to address mental health and gun-free zones.

A few things you won’t hear about from the saturation coverage of the Newtown, Conn., school massacre:

Mass shootings are no more common than they have been in past decades, despite the impression given by the media.

In fact, the high point for mass killings in the U.S. was 1929, according to criminologist Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections.

Incidents of mass murder in the U.S. declined from 42 in the 1990s to 26 in the first decade of this century.

The chances of being killed in a mass shooting are about what they are for being struck by lightning.

Until the Newtown horror, the three worst K–12 school shootings ever had taken place in either Britain or Germany.

Almost all of the public-policy discussion about Newtown has focused on a debate over the need for more gun control. In reality, gun control in a country that already has 200 million privately owned firearms is likely to do little to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals. We would be better off debating two taboo subjects — the laws that make it difficult to control people with mental illness and the growing body of evidence that “gun-free” zones, which ban the carrying of firearms by law-abiding individuals, don’t work.

First, the mental-health issue. A lengthy study by Mother Jones magazine found that at least 38 of the 61 mass shooters in the past three decades “displayed signs of mental health problems prior to the killings.” New York Times columnist David Brooks and Cornell Law School professor William Jacobson have both suggested that the ACLU-inspired laws that make it so difficult to intervene and identify potentially dangerous people should be loosened. “Will we address mental-health and educational-privacy laws, which instill fear of legal liability for reporting potentially violent mentally ill people to law enforcement?” asks Professor Jacobson. “I doubt it.”
Gun-free zones have been the most popular response to previous mass killings. But many law-enforcement officials say they are actually counterproductive. “Guns are already banned in schools. That is why the shootings happen in schools. A school is a ‘helpless-victim zone,’” says Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff. “Preventing any adult at a school from having access to a firearm eliminates any chance the killer can be stopped in time to prevent a rampage,” Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, told me earlier this year at the time of the Aurora, Colo., Batman-movie shooting. Indeed, there have been many instances — from the high-school shooting by Luke Woodham in Mississippi, to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo. — where a killer has been stopped after someone got a gun from a parked car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter.

Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed, such as shopping malls and schools.

I spoke with Lott after the Newtown shooting, and he confirmed that nothing has changed to alter his findings. He noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons.

“Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks,” Lott told me. “A couple hundred people were in the Cinemark Theater when the killer arrived. There is an extremely high probability that one or more of them would have had a legal concealed handgun with him if they had not been banned.”

Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”

There is no evidence that private holders of concealed-carry permits (which are either easy to obtain or not even required in more than 40 states) are any more irresponsible with firearms than the police. According to a 2005 to 2007 study by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and Bowling Green State University, police nationwide were convicted of firearms violations at least at a 0.002 percent annual rate. That’s about the same rate as holders of carry permits in the states with “shall issue” laws.

Despite all of this evidence, the magical thinking behind gun-free zones is unlikely to be questioned in the wake of the Newtown killings. Having such zones gives people a false sense of security, and woe to the politician or business owner who now suggests that a “gun-free zone” revert back to what critics would characterize as “a wild, wild West” status. Indeed, shortly after the Cinemark attack in Colorado, the manager of the nearby Northfield Theaters changed its policy and began banning concealed handguns.

In all of the fevered commentary over the Newtown killings, you will hear little discussion of the fact that we may be making our families and neighbors less safe by expanding the places where guns aren’t allowed. But that is precisely what we may be doing. Both criminals and the criminally insane have shown time and time again that those laws are the least of the problems they face as they carry out their evil deeds.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund#

[StylinRed]

and yet you never answered

how do those instances of violence equate to magazine restrictions being ineffective?

if drawing arbitrary lines in the sand, to try and cut down gun violence, proves pointless then why not just cut guns out of the picture entirely? because getting your panties in a bunch is too great a call to curb/cut down mass murders?

or offer anything substantial at all in regards to why every other country with some semblance of gun control doesn't have anywhere remotely near the level of gun violence as the usa

you've just chosen to ignore and move on to your next repeated point of "guns for all!"....

[Hondaracer]

I think that's a pretty easy answer, the volume out there cannot be controlled, there are hundreds of thousands of huge magazines out there

You can restrict anything you want, if there are enough of Somthing floating around if you want it you'll get it

Also the culture if the US is completely different than almost every other country in the world
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

they could easily seize a great majority of the guns, it'll likely take years but still

you would only be left with those hardcore nuts who will try and hoard/hide their guns

and then they can begin offering money for guns, like they do in LA to try and dwindle down the remaining guns out there

etc etc

the only problem with that isn't the raving gun fanatic but rather the corporations like Walmart


the point is they could easily mitigate the issue but they refuse to

its just like the "war on drugs" it could easily be solved but the actual "war" employs a lot of people and the drugs also serve the govt. and govt. agencies need

[stewie]

saw this on facebook...had to..made me laugh

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/12089_473248562725846_1556433779_n.jpg

[Yodamaster]

I didn't think it was necessary to, and thankfully Mindbomber has taken care of the comparisons for me.

When comparing guns, you don't simply go "well they can both put a bullet in you,so they are exactly equal"

That would be like comparing a Ferrari with a Toyota and going "well they can both drive, so will be the same around a race track"

You listed the many reasons why the AK is so ubiquitous with many militaries around the world. Easy to use, easy to clean, easy to 'spray and pray'. You listed many of the advantages that all make it deadlier than other guns.

Yes, they can both put a bullet in people, but when one is so much easier to kill someone with, it becomes "a deadlier gun". Simply put, it is easier to kill someone with a rifle like an AK than it would be with many other rifles.

The guy who killed all those kids had shot each kid "more than two times". Would he have been able to do that so easily with a bolt action rifle? Maybe, or maybe it would have taken longer and he would have been captured. Or maybe he would have only shot each person once, and there would be survivors, who knows.

If a gun is built with the sole purpose of attacking humans, it has no business being in the hands of civilians. Or at least not with ammo within the same vicinity.



The AK74 and the AR-15 fire a very similar round, 5.45x39 vs 5.56x45

The AK47 and the M14 fire a very similar round, 7.62x39 vs 7.62x51

---

The 5.56x45 is deadlier than the 5.45x39

The 7.62x51 is deadlier than the 7.62x39

---

Both the AR-15 and the M14 are legal in Canada, the (semi auto) AK and all of it's variants are banned because of their looks, and only because of their looks.

The AK is no more capable than the M14 or AR-15 of killing many people in the wrong hands. Ease of cleaning is not an eligible cause for a ban, any firearm that has been taken apart to be cleaned is equally inoperable.

Ease of use does not contribute to a firearm's killing potential, the fraction of a second's difference between loading times and switching the safety to fire is not a valid reason for a ban of one particular rifle.

What you are looking for is the handling of the firearm, how easy it is to fire in rapid succession, and it is actually easier to control the recoil on an AR-15 than it is on an AK74. The M14 and the AK47 are approximately the same in terms of handling ability.

[shawnly1000]

Sigh...

"Republican congressman says Sandy Hook principal should have had a machine gun so she could 'take his head off before he killed those precious kids'"

Louie Gohmert says Sandy Hook Elementary School principal should have had a machine gun | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2249069/Louie-Gohmert-says-Sandy-Hook-Elementary-School-principal-machine-gun.html?ito=feeds-newsxml)

Same Congressman who has said a bunch of other whackjob things including "terror babies" Rep. Louie Gohmert Goes Berserk On Anderson Cooper!!! - YouTube

Sad that either this Congressman is trying to get attention for himself and/or his constituents would still reelect him.

[dinosaur]

I don't watch this show...but this is pretty moving.

Hallelujah - The Voice - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IO64urOFNaY)

RIP :(

[rsx]

I don't watch this show...but this is pretty moving.

Hallelujah - The Voice - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IO64urOFNaY)

RIP :(

This is what I posted on YT.

I'm not really feeling this. I would've rather have seen a darkened room, candles, the PICTURES of the victims and an unknown singer. This is about the victims, but it got turned into a celeb sing fest.

[dinosaur]

The thing that got me were the names and ages...

[RRxtar]

gun control is NOT the answer


canada has fairly strict gun control on restricted firearms such as hand guns yet this just happend:

A 29-year-old Kelowna man faces a more than a dozen weapons related charges after he was found to be in possession of a loaded gun at the Willow Park Pub last Saturday night.


Police say they were called to the pub about 6:45 p.m. after someone noticed the gun.

"When police arrived the man was found seated at the bar with a loaded .45 caliber pistol tucked in the back of his pants and a knife hanging from a chain around his neck," says Cst. Kris Clark.

"He was arrested without incident and the firearm and knife were seized. A second handgun was later seized from the man's residence."

Ryan Bradley Allin was also prohibited from possessing a firearm at the time of the incident.

Allin faces 13 charges, including:

Possessing a Weapon for a Dangerous Purpose X 2
Carrying a Concealed Weapon X 2
Unauthorized Possession of a Firearm X 2
Knowingly Possessing a Firearm Without a Licence X 2
Possessing a Restricted Firearm With Ammunition
Possessing a Weapon Obtained Through Offence X 2
Possessing a Firearm Contrary to Order X 2

how can gun control be the answer to keeping guns out of the hands of bad guys when this guy not only didn't have a gun licence to begin with, but was actually prohibited from owning guns, was carrying a stolen restricted hand gun to a local pub on a saturday afternoon and not a single fuck was given. and this is in kelowna where we get like 3 shootings a year. people dont roll with weapons here unlike vancouver and definitely unlike the USA. If it is that easy to roll with a hand gun when this guy should have absolutely no access to guns, how easy is it for someone who actually wants to hurt someone to get guns.

[StylinRed]

how can you point to exceptions to the rule and act as if that's damning evidence that gun control doesn't work? of course there will be cases in which guns are illegally acquired especially when our next door neighbour has a free flow of them

our problem in Canada with illegally acquired guns isn't our lack of control over it within the country but rather our borders with the united states allowing a free flow of illegal weapons to be smuggled over

and that guy in your article was caught and is being prosecuted; that same article can be used as an example of how gun control works even against those who illegally acquire them...

[RRxtar]

I am saying that even with the amount of gun control we have in Canada, which many people give as an example of what the US should do, it is still ridiculously easy to obtain guns. It doesn't matter if it came over the border or where it came from, the bad guys still have the guns, and our gun control is not keeping the guns out of their hands. Gun control keeps guns out of the hands of good guys.

This guy was arrested and is being prosecuted because instead of walking in and shooting up the restaurant, he sat at the bar and had a drink. Almost like carrying the gun contrary to the law was a complete joke to him. Maybe if he was a little more unstable, or had another drink or 2, he may have done some damage before someone called the police, we don't know.


Im not saying gun laws are silly and dont work. I am saying they are not the final answer to these shootings. The US needs to take some steps towards making guns more restricted (however that may be), but that wont solve the underlying problem. There is something wrong with the PEOPLE. Good law abiding people without mental health problems don't shoot 30 kids.

I am pointing to 'an exception to the rule' because these mass murders ARE exceptions to the rule.

[Graeme S]

Then we have to ask ourselves: if gun access isn't the difference, then what is? If it's possible for people to acquire guns just as easily here than there, then why is our gun violence and public-space-shooting rate so much lower?

My knee-jerk reaction is gun laws, but if it is as you say then I'm wrong--so what's our answer?

[StylinRed]

Gun control keeps guns out of the hands of good guys.

much of the mass killings or stories that spark the gun control argument in the states are from shooters who are the "good guys" they've legally acquired the guns, but they're crazy or they're irresponsible (the conceal carry holders who murder because they felt "threatened")

[Lomac]

Then we have to ask ourselves: if gun access isn't the difference, then what is? If it's possible for people to acquire guns just as easily here than there, then why is our gun violence and public-space-shooting rate so much lower?

Population difference
35 million vs 310 million

Health care
You'd be surprised at how many companies in Canada actually offer free psychiatrist sessions, whereas in the USA mental health is still considered a relatively taboo subject that a lot of health care companies don't like to touch.

Second Ammendment
Hate to say, but the "right to bear arms" plays partially into it... If someone feels entitled to something that's "rightfully" theirs, they're gonna take it, even if they don't need to. That sort of attitude doesn't necessarily mean that they have the same sort of healthy respect for firearms that Canadians may have (not to say all Americans are gun-toting yahoo's and all Canadians are law-abiding, upstanding citizens... but the stereotype does exist for a reason)

[RRxtar]

people who go crazy aren't 'good guys', they are people who most likely have mental health issues that should have been addressed.

maybe that is the answer? better access to mental health help in canada? maybe our society simply cares about each other a little more that the thought of a mass killing doesn't cross our minds? everyone joke that canada is so polite after all.

i don't have the answer. but i don't think the easy answer is the right one either.


but making it a little harder to buy a gun if you're bat shit crazy wouldn't hurt either. what does it take, 3 days 'cool down period' to buy a gun in the states? in canada it takes a written and practical test, 28 days and a series of background checks, and quite often another 1-3 months on top of that.

[Graeme S]

people who go crazy aren't 'good guys', they are people who most likely have mental health issues that should have been addressed.

maybe that is the answer? better access to mental health help in canada? maybe our society simply cares about each other a little more that the thought of a mass killing doesn't cross our minds? everyone joke that canada is so polite after all.

i don't have the answer. but i don't think the easy answer is the right one either

Yeah, I can't really disagree with that. There is never any "easy answer" for these kinds of problems. Each and every problem faces its own complexity and even I am sometimes faced with the mentality that arming the populace is not always a bad thing. Which, for a guy of my upbringing, is quite the turnabout.

Population difference
35 million vs 310 million

Health care
You'd be surprised at how many companies in Canada actually offer free psychiatrist sessions, whereas in the USA mental health is still considered a relatively taboo subject that a lot of health care companies don't like to touch.

Second Ammendment
Hate to say, but the "right to bear arms" plays partially into it... If someone feels entitled to something that's "rightfully" theirs, they're gonna take it, even if they don't need to. That sort of attitude doesn't necessarily mean that they have the same sort of healthy respect for firearms that Canadians may have (not to say all Americans are gun-toting yahoo's and all Canadians are law-abiding, upstanding citizens... but the stereotype does exist for a reason)

So I have a question--a serious one, not a flippant one, hopefully. What's the difference between an American with a second-amendment entitlement mentality, and the dude who was busted at the bar? Because when i think about that guy, I think he's probably the same kind of guy who would get busted with a DUI or have his license suspended and drive anyways "'cause I just gotta drive, and they can't tell me I can't!". If that makes any sense.


I hope I'm not just needling and being a thorn in either of your sides, solutions and resolutions are hard to come by, it seems.

[MindBomber]

Nope, I said that the AK is not as accurate as others that shoot the same rounds. There's the SKS-D which takes AK mags that you can actually buy in Canada but those are rare to find these days - they are not full-auto though. The CZ 858, another popular 7.62x39 rifle in Canada, is a semi-auto version of the full-auto vz58. Not as popular as the AK but widely used as well. We can talk guns if you want, but I'm sure this is not the thread to do it. Most people don't care enough to understand in details to begin with.

Also, as you said, to legal gun owners in Canada, none of the difference you listed matters. See, this is where people get mixed up when talking about gun control - what exactly is being controlled? If you're trying to prevent criminals from getting access to certain guns, then targeting legal owners does nothing at all since, as you mentioned, criminals have their own channels of arms supply.

If we're trying to control or prevent the "crazies" from getting guns, then the issue is mental health and the abundance of (or lack of) a support system for those that need it. That is not to say that having some form of gun control has no value - it does. As I mentioned, we can do as much as we can do to screen out those potentially unstable people from having lethal weapons, but there will always be times where a determined individual will obtain the tool they need to inflict the maximum amount of damage, guns or not.

I haven't been keeping up with the news on this incident lately - have they figured out the shooter's motive behind all this mess?

Thanks for clarifying, my reading comprehension goes down after 12am.

I'm not well versed enough to engage in serious technical discussions on guns. I've gleamed some knowledge from my exposure to guns though, and that causes me to question the comparison of the SKS and AK-47 as primarily aesthetically different. The mechanical design of the AK-47 seems to present a fundamentally more significant risk than the SKS if it reaches a person with ill intent.

I see placing restrictions on legal gun owners as having a purpose for a specific reason. There is no secret, backdoor warehouse, selling new illegal guns manufactured in America, but criminals have possession of exactly that. There is only one explanation, guns are being purchased legally, and being passed onto the illegal supply chain. Legal guns turned illegal feed not only the underground supply chain in America, but Canada and to an extent Mexico as well. I see that as the truest effect of America's lax gun control laws. I don't think anything will ever completely prevent a determined criminal from obtaining an illegal gun, because they certainly could be smuggled in from other continents. A gun smuggled in from Russia would be much more expensive than one from within the continent though, and that would at least make it a more difficult for the average criminal to get a hold of.

In Canada - I think our gun laws are very reasonable and prudent, I might like slightly tighter controls on restricted weapons, but overall, I think they're effective and fair. America just undermines them. I'm biased though, as I have no desire to own anything other than a basic hunting rifle.

people who go crazy aren't 'good guys', they are people who most likely have mental health issues that should have been addressed.

maybe that is the answer? better access to mental health help in canada? maybe our society simply cares about each other a little more that the thought of a mass killing doesn't cross our minds? everyone joke that canada is so polite after all.

i don't have the answer. but i don't think the easy answer is the right one either.


but making it a little harder to buy a gun if you're bat shit crazy wouldn't hurt either. what does it take, 3 days 'cool down period' to buy a gun in the states? in canada it takes a written and practical test, 28 days and a series of background checks, and quite often another 1-3 months on top of that.

What is access to mental health support like in Canada? Can I not just walk into any hospital and be directed to the necessary care?

In BC, if you have MSP coverage, I believe you are entitled to indefinite access to a psychiatrist.

I'm sure America is much different, and there is more to the lack of a fundamental social safety net causing these incidents.

[StylinRed]

Population difference
35 million vs 310 million


the percentage rate is where its at though and the US' is worse than Libya, India, Iran, Niger, etc etc etc; it matches Georgia (for murder) and for gun related deaths the US is just under South Africa and twice the rate of Canada and 37X the rate of the United Kingdom

[Meowjin]

Population difference
35 million vs 310 million

Health care
You'd be surprised at how many companies in Canada actually offer free psychiatrist sessions, whereas in the USA mental health is still considered a relatively taboo subject that a lot of health care companies don't like to touch.

Second Ammendment
Hate to say, but the "right to bear arms" plays partially into it... If someone feels entitled to something that's "rightfully" theirs, they're gonna take it, even if they don't need to. That sort of attitude doesn't necessarily mean that they have the same sort of healthy respect for firearms that Canadians may have (not to say all Americans are gun-toting yahoo's and all Canadians are law-abiding, upstanding citizens... but the stereotype does exist for a reason)

PSYCHIATRISTS ARE COVERED UNDER MSP

PSYCHOLOGISTS ARE NOT.

[Lomac]

PSYCHIATRISTS ARE COVERED UNDER MSP

PSYCHOLOGISTS ARE NOT.

I actually meant psychologist. And I was referring to the fact that many companies give free access to them, not that they're covered by MSP

So I have a question--a serious one, not a flippant one, hopefully. What's the difference between an American with a second-amendment entitlement mentality, and the dude who was busted at the bar? Because when i think about that guy, I think he's probably the same kind of guy who would get busted with a DUI or have his license suspended and drive anyways "'cause I just gotta drive, and they can't tell me I can't!". If that makes any sense.

I think the main difference between the two is that a person who picks up a gun illegally can probably correctly be argued that they intend to use it for means that are less than legit. Chances are he wasn't planning on hunting deer with a handgun. A second-ammendment entitled person may have a cavalier attitude towards firearms, but they likely aren't going to carry it around with designs in mind about robbing a bank or protecting themselves from a drug deal gone wrong.

the percentage rate is where its at though and the US' is worse than Libya, India, Iran, Niger, etc etc etc; it matches Georgia (for murder) and for gun related deaths the US is just under South Africa and twice the rate of Canada and 37X the rate of the United Kingdom

I never claimed it was a legitimate answer. I was just throwing various differences out between USA and Canada.

Personally I don't agree with the concept that "the more guns there are in civilians hands, the less likely crime will occur." Obviously banning guns outright simply means that the only people to carry firearms would be law enforcement personnel, legal bodyguard companies and criminals. I don't doubt that by banning guns that you'd likely prevent a couple random shootings but, by looking at the bigger picture, all you're doing is avoiding the bigger problem: Why are people doing these shootings?

Looking at the USA by itself, it has some giant economic and social issues that is polarizing many people. Firearm murders in the USA are actually dropping over the last few years, but in cities where there are huge problems at play, like Detroit, gun-related crimes are actually rising significantly. One would think that there's a reason for why certain areas have a spike in these states when the overall trend is dropping.

I dunno, I'm tired and I'm quickly losing my focus...

Just one last thing to think about, though:

2009 stats from the Brady Act:

150,000 -- Brady Act background checks in 2009 that led to the rejection of a potential gun buyer's application.

39 -- Percentage of applications denied by states because of a felony conviction or indictment.

So obviously it is working somewhat. I would say it's not enough, but at least not everyone applying for a weapon is getting 'em...

[Yodamaster]

Then we have to ask ourselves: if gun access isn't the difference, then what is? If it's possible for people to acquire guns just as easily here than there, then why is our gun violence and public-space-shooting rate so much lower?

My knee-jerk reaction is gun laws, but if it is as you say then I'm wrong--so what's our answer?

Lack of health care for mentally ill citizens. Though the actual difference in shooting deaths is influenced by the population gap between Canada and the United States to some extent.

I was seriously depressed when I was younger, the help I recieved changed my life. Having somebody to just talk to in private makes a world of difference, I can't imagine what it would feel like to not having access to that kind of help.

The majority of people with mental issues attempt to hide most of their outward emotions regarding their problems. It doesn't go away, it simply compounds, and when you have enough negative thoughts trapped inside, you do something you shouldn't have.

The problem is, that lack of help is a jarring reality in the U.S, and it leads to a lot of social unrest given the population. Given the prevalence of illegal and improperly stored legal firearms, it creates a perfect storm for tradegies such as this.

You don't need restrictions on the guns (take that in moderation), you need restrictions on how the guns are aquired and treated (wherever they are stored). The mother of the shooter did not have the guns locked away safely (in addition to a lack of trigger locks), and as such, were stolen and used for a crime with ease.

Canada has a fairly efficient system, not just anybody can aquire a firearm, you have to prove that you can respect the gun, and that you are healthy enough to own one. While I disagree with some grey areas that the government has chosen to enforce in terms of the firearms available, I do not disagree that the method required to obtain them is probably the safest and most effective there is.

[THORISHERE]

There is a very thoroughly researched book called "Columbine" in which the author spent many years investigating what exactly happened at Columbine high-school where 15 people were killed. In short, after his exhaustive study, he concluded that in large part the two teenagers that were involved in the massacre were suffering from psychological disorders for which they were taking prescription drugs to ameliorate (these drugs themselves may have had side effects that contributed to the shooting). The author posited that if our society was better informed about the psychological/neurological pathologies that affect many people in our communities, and invested in the care and treatment of these individuals, tragedies like that which took place at Columbine high school could be significantly reduced in the future.

Lastly, my thoughts on guns is that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Instead of using violence (through government) to limit people's right to protect themselves and their families, we could be much better off using our resources to build healthier communities. Case in point, Switzerland has really high rates of gun ownership and it's a very safe and prosperous.

[ziggyx]

Just saw on the news that an 11 year old kid carried a gun to school after the whole incident. The kid said it was for his own safety or something. Thats pretty unbelivable..
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

^^^^ can thank the parents for scaring the shit out of him into thinking he'd need to take one for protection and leaving a gun where he has access to it

[Gh0stRider]

Just saw on the news that an 11 year old kid carried a gun to school after the whole incident. The kid said it was for his own safety or something. Thats pretty unbelivable..
Posted via RS Mobile

11-year-old US boy arrested after bringing gun to school, cites fear of mass shooting



A Utah sixth-grader caught with a gun at school told administrators he brought the weapon to defend himself in case of an attack similar to last week's mass shooting at a Connecticut school, officials said Tuesday.

The 11-year-old was being held in juvenile detention on suspicion of possessing a dangerous weapon and aggravated assault after other students at the suburban Salt Lake City elementary school told police he threatened them with the handgun.



Read more: 11-year-old US boy arrested after bringing gun to school, cites fear of mass shooting (http://www.theprovince.com/news/year+arrested+after+bringing+school+cites+fear+mas s+shooting/7716397/story.html#ixzz2FXFsoElE)

[Bonjour43MA]

how can you point to exceptions to the rule and act as if that's damning evidence that gun control doesn't work? of course there will be cases in which guns are illegally acquired especially when our next door neighbour has a free flow of them

our problem in Canada with illegally acquired guns isn't our lack of control over it within the country but rather our borders with the united states allowing a free flow of illegal weapons to be smuggled over

and that guy in your article was caught and is being prosecuted; that same article can be used as an example of how gun control works even against those who illegally acquire them...

so, if our problem is the flow of illegal guns coming from across the border, how are these gun laws stopping them from coming in? Oh wait, they aren't! because criminals don't obey laws. Everything in the Firearms Act is for those that abide by them - legal gun owners!

then, "exception to the rule"? Isn't EVERY mass shooting an exception to the rule? the whole point of gun control, from the anti-gun perspective, is that by eliminating guns or making it extremely difficult to acquire them, there would be NO shootings. The example given by RRxStar is perfect in showing that, even with our strict gun laws in Canada, this guy somehow was able to get a gun illegally, loaded it, and brought it to a pub. Thankfully he didn't shoot anyone with it. According to your logic (that gun control "works"), this should've NEVER happened, right? but no, it did!

These laws are supposed to be preventative measures and not just there to give out sentences to those that break them. In this case, the guy had:

- no license
- no permission to acquire and posses a gun
- no permission to bring a loaded gun to public venues
- no fear of being prosecuted
- no regard for the laws that are in place that's supposed to deter him from doing everything mentioned above

how could you say that gun control works when he broke every single one of them?

Gun laws make it difficult for law abiding citizens to acquire guns (for hunting, target shooting, sport shooting, collecting, etc), but they do very little in getting guns out of criminals' hands (duh! criminals don't care about these laws!).

You also mentioned that "most mass shooters, or "good people", went crazy with their legally acquired guns" - by saying that you basically painted everyone with a firearms license with the same brush, marking them as "potential criminals/crazies". Well, there are 2 million of them in Canada, legally, so I suggest you run and hide because they're everywhere, and they're all a bunch of ticking time bombs waiting to explode! Scary!

People don't just "go crazy" and start shooting others, they "go crazy" after suffering mental illness for a long period of time and got to the tipping point where they had no choice (in their mind) but to kill, so that they can get noticed to receive help. I am very certain that if guns didn't exist, we'd be talking about swords, knives, crossbows, etc, trying to figure out how to restrict them, ban them, or control the heck out of them, because the world can be a better place without them, right....?

Sounds like a familiar discussion to me.

[rsx]

11-year-old US boy arrested after bringing gun to school, cites fear of mass shooting



A Utah sixth-grader caught with a gun at school told administrators he brought the weapon to defend himself in case of an attack similar to last week's mass shooting at a Connecticut school, officials said Tuesday.

The 11-year-old was being held in juvenile detention on suspicion of possessing a dangerous weapon and aggravated assault after other students at the suburban Salt Lake City elementary school told police he threatened them with the handgun.



Read more: 11-year-old US boy arrested after bringing gun to school, cites fear of mass shooting (http://www.theprovince.com/news/year+arrested+after+bringing+school+cites+fear+mas s+shooting/7716397/story.html#ixzz2FXFsoElE)

This quote was especially troubling

“He pulled out a gun and put it to my head. He said he was gonna kill us. I told him I was gonna go tell. He said, if you tell I’m gonna kill you.”
-http://americablog.com/2012/12/kid-brings-gun-to-school-sandy-hook.html

[iEatClams]

Anxious parents buy armoured backpacks, gun lovers stock up on assault weapons (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Anxious+parents+armoured+backpacks+lovers+stock+as sault+weapons/7723526/story.html#ixzz2FZfBzfv9)


SALT LAKE CITY -- The reaction to the deadly Connecticut school shooting can be seen at gun stores and self-defence retailers across the nation, with anxious parents buying armored backpacks for children and firearms enthusiasts stocking up on assault weapons in anticipation of tighter gun control measures.

A spike in gun sales is common after a mass shooting, but the latest rampage has generated record sales in some states, particularly of rifles similar to the AR-15 the gunman used in an attack Friday on Sandy Hook Elementary School that killed 26 people, including 20 children.

Colorado set a single-day record for gun background check requests the day after the shootings, while Nevada saw more checks in the two days that followed than any other weekend this year. Records were also set in Tennessee, California and Virginia, among others.

Some gun shop owners stopped selling their remaining stock of military-style rifles, anticipating only more interest and value after President Barack Obama on Wednesday instructed his administration to create concrete proposals to reduce gun violence.

Robert Akers, a Rapid City, S.D., gun seller who specializes in such rifles, said the rush of customers had transformed his Rapid Fire Firearms store into a "madhouse" and that he's not actively selling the guns and has turned off his phone.

"The price is only going to go up higher," he said.

There was also an unusual increase in sales for armored backpacks designed to shield children caught in shootings, according to three companies that make them.

The armor inserts fit into the back panel of a child's backpack, and sell for up to $400, depending on the retailer. The armor is designed to stop bullets from handguns, not assault weapons like the one used in the shooting at the Newtown, Conn., school.

Still, the manufacturers and some parents say that while they don't guarantee children won't be killed, they could still be used as shields.

Ken Larson, 41, of Denver, Colo., already had an armored backpack for himself and persuaded his wife to buy one for their 1-year-old after the latest shootings. He knows the backpack won't guarantee his son's safety. But, he added, it was a worthy precaution.

"It's a no brainer. My son's life is invaluable," Larson said. "If I can get him a backpack for $200 that makes him safer, I don't even have to think about that."

Some experts, however, say sending children to school in armored backpacks is not a healthy response to fear about mass shootings. Anne Marie Albano, psychiatry director at Columbia University's Clinic for Anxiety and Related Disorders, said parents should convey calmness, not anxiety.

"This is not serving to keep children safe," she said. "This is serving to increase their fear and their suspicion of their peers."

At Amendment II in Salt Lake City, sales of its children's backpacks and armored inserts have increased, with 200 purchase requests Wednesday alone.

"The incident last week highlights the need to protect our children," said co-owner Derek Williams. "We didn't get in this business to do this. But the fact is that our armor can help children just as it can help soldiers."

Kerry Clark, president of Texas-based Backpackshield.com, began making the backpacks after the deadly mass shooting at Virginia Tech in 2007. Clark said he sold 15 backpacks Wednesday. Prior to Friday's shooting, he said, the company would sometimes go an entire month and just sell one.

"It's the busiest I've seen it in my life," he said.

Bullet Blocker, a Massachusetts-based company that sells the backpack armor, declined to provide sales numbers but noted that recent sales were substantially more than normal.

Sales of assault weapons also were on the rise.

Austin Cook, general manager of Hoover Tactical Firearms in suburban Birmingham, Ala., said the spike in sales since Friday's shootings has been so intense that federal background checks that typically take five minutes or less are now taking up to an hour.

Cook said about 50 people were waiting in line for his store to open the morning after the shootings, and that he's since sold nearly all of his assault weapons. Now, he's trying to find more distributors.

"I can't keep them in the store," Cook said.

In Pittsburgh, Dick's Sporting Goods said it was suspending sales of modern rifles nationwide because of the shooting. The company also said it's removing all guns from display at its store closest to Newtown.

Aaron Byrd, co-owner of Patriot Shooting Sports in Youngsville, N.C., is sold out of the AR-15 rifles, ammo for those types of guns and high-capacity magazines.

"Things have been crazy the past couple of days. A lot of people have been coming in looking to purchase semiautomatic rifles. They're worried that the government's going to ban semiautomatic rifles and high-capacity magazines, so they've been coming in looking for those," he said.

He added, "I think it is a knee-jerk reaction by both parties - both the government and the citizens."



Read more: Anxious parents buy armoured backpacks, gun lovers stock up on assault weapons (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Anxious+parents+armoured+backpacks+lovers+stock+as sault+weapons/7723526/story.html#ixzz2FZfBzfv9)

[stewie]

Just saw on the news that an 11 year old kid carried a gun to school after the whole incident. The kid said it was for his own safety or something. Thats pretty unbelivable..
Posted via RS Mobile

earlier on the news i saw it saying how some teachers keep firearms in their classrooms.

i dont know about all kids, but i know damn well when i was younger, after the teacher would confiscate something i had and put it in her desk...the moment she got up to leave the room, a few kids would run up and get their stuff back. i dont even want to imagine what a shit disturbing 9 year old would do if they found a loaded gun in a teachers desk..

it should be mandatory for all firearms to have a trigger lock that opens with a key, and the key to be on the registered owner at all times. to top it off, law enforcement should do random check ups to make sure the firearms are being stored in a safe manner.

ive a trigger lock on all my firearms, not key locks, just the locks where you put in 3 numbers...and anyone with 15 minutes to kill can easily open it...sooner or later your going to get the right number...but then again, all my firearms are inside a gun safe with trigger locks, and the only 2 people with a key to the safe are my dad and myself.

[trollface]

To be fair, we're are required to have locks on them. Just wondering, why safe + trigger locks?

[stewie]

To be fair, we're are required to have locks on them. Just wondering, why safe + trigger locks?

sorry, i was trying to say a trigger lock that requires a key to open it.

since i only have locks that require the sliding 3 numbers, if anyone were to ever get their hands on it, an easy 15 minutes of going throung 1-1-1 no 1-1-2 no etc would unlock the gun. so for that reason, i also have a safe...just for added safety measures.

[StylinRed]

so, if our problem is the flow of illegal guns coming from across the border, how are these gun laws stopping them from coming in? Oh wait, they aren't! because criminals don't obey laws. Everything in the Firearms Act is for those that abide by them - legal gun owners!

the laws aren't made to prevent smugglers, but they do allow the seizure and imprisonment of those that do smuggle them in; never said our laws were perfect

then, "exception to the rule"? Isn't EVERY mass shooting an exception to the rule? the whole point of gun control, from the anti-gun perspective, is that by eliminating guns or making it extremely difficult to acquire them, there would be NO shootings. the hope is that there would be no shootings but laws need to be a lot more strict for that to happen; it's not like we don't see them working elsewhere where there is virtually no shootings yearly

The example given by RRxStar is perfect in showing that, even with our strict gun laws in Canada, this guy somehow was able to get a gun illegally, loaded it, and brought it to a pub. Thankfully he didn't shoot anyone with it. According to your logic (that gun control "works"), this should've NEVER happened, right? but no, it did!

you're assuming our laws are strict in Canada, they aren't, not imo especially with our loose borders and neighbour that leaves guns laying around for the picking


- no license
- no permission to acquire and posses a gun
- no permission to bring a loaded gun to public venues
- no fear of being prosecuted
- no regard for the laws that are in place that's supposed to deter him from doing everything mentioned above

how could you say that gun control works when he broke every single one of them?

he bypassed the laws, gun control works for the majority and they help in prosecuting and seizing those that bypass or break them

Gun laws make it difficult for law abiding citizens to acquire guns (for hunting, target shooting, sport shooting, collecting, etc), but they do very little in getting guns out of criminals' hands (duh! criminals don't care about these laws!). good they should make it difficult; of course "thugs, gangsters, et al" may still get their hands on them but they're not the ones performing mass shootings the ones that are doing that are the seemingly law abiding US citizen whose able to get their hands on guns due to the lax gun laws; harsher sentences and stricter laws/screening will prevent that... it's not like we don't have evidence of it working... hell its working even in Canada compared to the USA and the UK is doing it far better than the both of us

You also mentioned that "most mass shooters, or "good people", went crazy with their legally acquired guns" - by saying that you basically painted everyone with a firearms license with the same brush, marking them as "potential criminals/crazies". Well, there are 2 million of them in Canada, legally, so I suggest you run and hide because they're everywhere, and they're all a bunch of ticking time bombs waiting to explode! Scary!

no it doesn't paint everyone as crazies.... not that they are or aren't... it shows that laws need to be stricter to weed out the crazies in the USA; we don't have anywhere near the problem the USA does... i get the feeling you're blurring lines of the conversation about the USA with Canada

People don't just "go crazy" and start shooting others, they "go crazy" after suffering mental illness for a long period of time and got to the tipping point where they had no choice (in their mind) but to kill, so that they can get noticed to receive help. I am very certain that if guns didn't exist, we'd be talking about swords, knives, crossbows, etc, trying to figure out how to restrict them, ban them, or control the heck out of them, because the world can be a better place without them, right....? no we have evidence that that's not true at all...

[Hondaracer]

What do "stiffer sentences" do to somone who doesn't care about living..
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

What do "stiffer sentences" do to somone who doesn't care about living..
Posted via RS Mobile

stiffer sentences for the common criminal since bonjour brought that into the discussion

common criminals want to live; and as seen in japan and the uk it is a deterrent to that category (minimum 5 years in the uk for a gun and up to 4 years for a knife; Japan up to 10 years)

[Hondaracer]

I completely agree with that, however that doesn't prevent these instances
Posted via RS Mobile

[RRxtar]

brb 10 years in prison for suicide bombers.

[StylinRed]

I completely agree with that, however that doesn't prevent these instances
Posted via RS Mobile

not directly it doesn't but it helps in keeping illegal guns off the street so whackos who aren't able to get a gun legally will also have a tougher time to get illegal ones since they likely won't be as accessible as they are especially in the US

[shawnly1000]

:facepalm:

NRA: "Only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"; suggesting schools need armed security

Only in America do you get such logic (or lack thereof)...

[Tapioca]

^ Did anyone really expect a different response from the NRA.

To their credit, the NRA did criticize the impact of violence in video games and TV.
Posted via RS Mobile

[InvisibleSoul]

:facepalm:

NRA: "Only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"; suggesting schools need armed security

Only in America do you get such logic (or lack thereof)...

And he would like that done by the time kids get back from Christmas break.

There are over 130,000 schools in the US. So he wants there to magically be 130,000 new gun-toting guards hired and on duty within two weeks.

Let's say each gets paid an annual salary of $50,000. That's only $6.5B per year... pocket change!

Forget about the logistics. Would this even help?

So if there was an armed guard at every school, I would think that any potential killer would take them out first in a surprise attack... thus not changing anything.

So what then? Two armed guards at every school?

I haven't really had a stance on this issue. I just hate stupidity.

[Traum]

Pretty funny how a marketing expert is openly dissing these NRA guys:

NRA’s comments are ‘arrogant’: prof | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2012/12/21/nras-comments-are-arrogant-prof/)

“What it is is a full defensive mode… it’s the same defensive mode that got Exxon Valdez people in trouble past their eyeballs. It does not work. We have taught… do not use this approach. This guys are dumber than bricks.”

“I would not take their intellectual ability, strategically, to a dog fight,” he says.

Meredith adds he’s never watched anything this disastrous in the 45 years he’s been teaching and studying public relations.

[Graeme S]

The full transcript of the NRA's conference:

No TL;DR, read for yourself and take from it what you will. I worry that a TL;DR would be influenced by my personal take on the issue.
DAVID KEENE, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION: Good morning. I’m Dave Keene, president of the National Rifle Association of America.

And I’d like to welcome you here this morning for the purposes of beginning our discussion of the topic that’s been on the mind of American parents across this country, and that is, what do we do about the tragedies of the sort that struck in Newtown, Connecticut -- to avoid such events in the future?

Like most Americans, we were shocked by what happened. Like all Americans, we’ve been discussing all of the various options that are available to protect our children, and at this point we would like to share our thinking with you.

And for that purpose I’d like to introduce Wayne LaPierre, our executive vice president.

Thank you again for being with us.

And at the end of this conference we will not be taking questions, but next week we will be available to any of you who are interested in talking about these or other issues of interest to you, so contact us, please, at that point.

Thank you very much.

Wayne?

WAYNE LAPIERRE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NRA: Good morning.

The National Rifle Association -- 4 million mothers, fathers, sons and daughters -- join the nation in horror, outrage, grief, and earnest prayer for the families of Newtown, Connecticut, who have suffered such an incomprehensible loss as a result of this unspeakable crime.

Out of respect for the families and until the facts are known, the NRA has refrained from comment.

While some have tried to exploit tragedy for political gain, we have remained respectably silent. Now, we must speak for the safety of our nation’s children.

LAPIERRE: Because for all the noise and anger directed at us over the past week, no one, nobody has addressed the most important, pressing and immediate question we face: How do we protect our children right now, starting today, in a way that we know works?

The only way to answer that question is to face the truth. Politicians pass laws for gun free school zones, they issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them. And, in doing so, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are the safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.

How have our nation’s priorities gotten so far out of order. Think about it. We care about our money, so we protect our banks with armed guards. American airports, office buildings, power plants, court houses, even sports stadiums are all protected by armed security.

LAPIERRE: We care about our president, so we protect him with armed Secret Service agents. Members of Congress work in offices surrounded by Capitol Police officers. Yet, when it comes to our most beloved, innocent, and vulnerable members of the American family, our children, we as a society leave them every day utterly defenseless, and the monsters and the predators of the world know it, and exploit it.

That must change now. The truth is...

PROTESTER: (inaudible) stop killing our children. It’s the NRA and -- the assault weapons that are killing our children, not (inaudible) teacher. We’ve got to end (inaudible). We’ve got to end the violence. We’ve got to stop the killers, stop the killing our children, stop killing our (inaudible) stop killing in our streets.

The NRA is killing our children. We’ve got to stop the violence, and violence begins with the NRA. Stating the true facts that they are the perpetrators of the violence that is taking place in our schools and on our streets.

LAPIERRE: The truth is, that our society is populated by an unknown number of genuine monsters. People that are so deranged, so evil, so possessed by voices and driven by demons, that no sane person can every possibly comprehend them. They walk among us every single day, and does anybody really believe that the next Adam Lanza isn’t planning his attack on a school, he’s already identified at this very moment?

LAPIERRE: How many more copycats are waiting in the wings for their moment of fame from a national media machine that rewards them with wall-to-wall attention and a sense of identity that they crave, while provoking others to try to make their mark.

A dozen more killers, a hundred more? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation’s refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill? The fact is this: That wouldn’t even begin to address the much larger, more lethal criminal class -- killers, robbers, rapists, gang members who have spread like cancer in every community across our nation.

Meanwhile, while that happens, federal gun prosecutions have decreased by 40 percent, to the lowest levels in a decade. So now, due to a declined willingness to prosecute dangerous criminals, violent crime is increasing again for the first time in 19 years. Add another hurricane, terrorist attack, or some other natural of manmade disaster, and you’ve got a recipe for a national nightmare of violence and victimization.

LAPIERRE: And here’s another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal. There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people. Through vicious, violent video games with names like “Bullet Storm,” “Grand Theft Auto,” “Mortal Combat,” and “Splatterhouse.”

And here’s one, it’s called “Kindergarten Killers.” It’s been online for 10 years. How come my research staff can find it, and all of yours couldn’t? Or didn’t want anyone to know you had found it? Add another hurricane, add another natural disaster. I mean we have blood-soaked films out there, like “American Psycho,” “Natural Born Killers.” They’re aired like propaganda loops on Splatterdays and every single day.

1,000 music videos, and you all know this, portray life as a joke and they play murder -- portray murder as a way of life. And then they all have the nerve to call it entertainment. But is that what it really is? Isn’t fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography? In a race to the bottom, many conglomerates compete with one another to shock, violate, and offend every standard of civilized society, by bringing an even more toxic mix of reckless behavior, and criminal cruelty right into our homes. Every minute, every day, every hour of every single year.

LAPIERRE: A child growing up in America today witnesses 16,000 murders, and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18. And, throughout it all, too many in the national media, their corporate owners, and their stockholders act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators.

Rather than face their own moral failings, the media demonize gun owners.

PROTESTER: (OFF-MIKE) coming from the NRA.

The NRA has blood on its hands. The NRA has blood on its hands. Shame on the NRA.

Ban assault weapons now. Ban assault weapons now. NRA (inaudible) assault weapons now.

(CROSSTALK)

PROTESTER: Mr. LaPierre, what is reaction to this?

LAPIERRE: Rather than face -- rather than face their own moral failings the media demonize lawful gun owners, amplify their cries for more laws, and fill the national media with misinformation and dishonest thinking that only delay meaningful action, and all but guarantee that the next atrocity is only a news cycle away.

LAPIERRE: The media calls semi-automatic fire arms, machine guns. They claim these civilian semi-automatic fire arms are used by the military. They tell us that the .223 is one of the most powerful rifle calibers, when all of these claims are factually untrue, they don’t know what they’re talking about.

Worse, they perpetuate the dangerous notion that one more gun ban or one more law imposed on peaceable, lawful people will protect us where 20,000 other laws have failed.

As brave and heroic and as self-sacrificing as those teachers were in those classrooms and as prompt and professional and well- trained as those police were when they responded, they were unable -- through no fault of their own, unable to stop it.

As parents we do everything we can to keep our children safe. It’s now time for us to assume responsibility for our schools. The only way -- the only way to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be personally involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

Would you rather have your 911 call bring a good guy with a gun from a mile away or from a minute away?

LAPIERRE: Now, I can imagine the headlines, the shocking headlines you’ll print tomorrow. “More guns,” you’ll claim, “are the NRA’s answer to everything.” Your implication will be that guns are evil and have no place in society, much less in our schools.

But since when did “gun” automatically become a bad word? A gun in the hands of a Secret Service agent protecting our president isn’t a bad word. A gun in the hands of a soldier protecting the United States of America isn’t a bad word. And when you hear your glass breaking at three a.m. and you call 9/11, you won’t be able to pray hard enough for a gun in the hands of a good guy to get there fast enough to protect you.

So, why is the idea of a gun good when it’s used to protect the president of our country or our police, but bad when it’s used to protect our children in our schools? They’re our kids. They’re our responsibility. And it’s not just our duty to protect them, it’s our right to protect them.

LAPIERRE: You know, five years ago after the Virginia Tech tragedy, when I said we should put armed security in every school, the media called me crazy. But what if -- what if when Adam Lanza started shooting his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School last Friday, he’d been confronted by qualified armed security? Will you at least admit it’s possible that 26 little kids, that 26 innocent lives might have been spared that day? Is it so important to you (inaudible) would rather continue to risk the alternative? Is the press and the political class here in Washington D.C. so consumed by fear and hatred of the NRA and American gun owners, that you’re willing to accept the world, where real resistance to evil monsters is alone, unarmed school principal left to surrender her life, her life, to shield those children in her care.

No one. No one, regardless of personal, political prejudice has the right to impose that sacrifice.

Ladies and gentlemen, there’s no national one size fits all solution to protecting our children. But do know that this president zeroed out school emergency planning grants in last year’s budget and scrapped Secure Our Schools policing grants in next year’s budget.

With all the foreign aid the United States does, with all the money in the federal budget, can’t we afford to put a police officer in every single school? Even if they did that, politicians have no business and no authority denying us the right, the ability, and the moral imperative to protect ourselves and our loved ones from harm.

LAPIERRE: Now, the National Rifle Association knows there are millions of qualified and active retired police, active, Reserve, and retired military, security professionals, certified firefighters, security professionals, rescue personnel, an extraordinary corps of patriotic, trained, qualified citizens to join with local school officials and police in devising a protection plan for every single school.

We could deploy them to protect our kids now. We can immediately make America’s schools safer, relying on the brave men and women in America’s police forces. The budgets -- and you all know this, everyone in the country knows this -- of our local police departments are strained, and the resources are severely limited, but their dedication and courage is second to none. And, they can be deployed right now.

I call on Congress today, to act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation. And, to do it now to make sure that blanket safety is in place when our kids return to school in January.

Before Congress reconvenes, before we engage in any lengthy debate over legislation, regulation, or anything else, as soon as our kids return to school after the holiday break, we need to have every single school in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work and by that I mean armed security.

LAPIERRE: Right now today every school in the United States should plan meetings with parents, school administrators, teachers, local authorities and draw upon every resource that’s out there and available to erect a cordon of protection around our kids right now.

Every school is gonna have a different solution based on its own unique situation. Every school in America needs to immediately identify, dedicate and deploy the resources necessary to put these security forces in place, though, right now.

And the National Rifle Association, as America’s preeminent trainer of law enforcement and security personnel for the past 50 years -- we have 11,000 police training instructors in the NRA -- is ready, willing and uniquely qualified to help.

Our training programs are the most advanced in the world. That expertise must be brought to bear to protect our schools and our children now.

We did it through (ph) our nation’s defense industries and military installations during World War II. We did it for very young kids with our Eddie Eagle child safety program that is throughout the country in schools right now, and we’ll do it again today.

LAPIERRE: The NRA is gonna bring all its knowledge, all its dedication and all its resources to develop a model national schools shield emergency response program for every single school in America that wants it. From armed security to building design and access control, to information technology, to student and teacher training, this multifaceted program will be developed by the very best experts in the field. Former Congressman Asa Hutchinson will lead the effort as national director of the National Model School Shield Program, with a budget provided by the NRA of whatever scope the task requires. His experience as United States attorney, director of the Drug Enforcement Agency, and undersecretary of the Department of Homeland Security will give him the knowledge and expertise to hire the most knowledgeable and credentialed experts that are available in the United States of America to get this program up and running from the first day forward.

If we truly cherish our kids, more than our money, more than our celebrities, more than our sports stadiums, we must give them the greatest level of protection possible. And that security is only available with properly trained, armed good guys. Under Asa’s leadership, our team of security experts will make this program available to the world for protecting our children in school. And we’ll make the program available to every single school in America, free of charge. That’s a plan of action that can, and will make a real positive, indisputable difference in the safety of our children, and it will start right now.

LAPIERRE: There’s going to be a lot of time for talk, and debate later. This is a time this is a day for decisive action. We can’t wait for the next unspeakable crime to happen before we act. We can’t lose precious time debating legislation that won’t work. We mustn’t allow politics or personal prejudice to divide us. We must act now for the sake of every child in America.

I call on every parent. I call on every teacher. I call on every school administrator, every law enforcement officer in this country, to join with us and help create a national schools shield safety program to protect our children with the only positive line of defense that’s tested and proven to work.

And now, to tell you more about the program, I’d like to introduce the head of the effort, former U.S. congressman, former U.S. attorney for the western district of Arkansas, and former administrator of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, the Honorable Congressman Asa Hutchinson.

Asa?

FORMER REP. ASA HUTCHINSON, R-ARK.: Thank you, Wayne.

One of the first responsibilities I learned at Homeland Security was the importance of protecting our nation’s critical infrastructure. And there’s nothing more critical to our nation’s well being than our children’s safety. They are this country’s future and our most precious resource.

HUTCHINSON: We all understand that our children should be safe in school. But it is also essential that the parents understand and have confidence in that safety. As a result of the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, that confidence across this nation has been shattered. Assurance of school safety must be restored with a sense of urgency.

That is why I’m grateful that the National Rifle Association has asked me to lead a team of security experts to assist our schools, parents, and our communities.

I took this assignment on one condition, that my team of experts will be independent and will be guided solely by what are the best security solutions for the safety of our children while at school. Even though we are just starting this process, I envision this initiative will have two key elements.

First of all, it would be based on a model security plan, a comprehensive strategy for school security based upon the latest, most up-to-date technical information from the foremost experts in their fields. This model security plan will serve as a template, a set of best practices, principles, and guidelines that every school in America can tweak as needed and tailor to their own set of circumstances.

Every school and community is different, but this model security plan will allow every school to choose among its various components to develop a school safety strategy that fits their own unique circumstance, whether its a large urban school or a small rural school such as we have in Arkansas or anything in between.

Armed, trained, qualified school security personnel will be one element of that plan, but by no means, the only element. If a school decides, for whatever reason, that it doesn’t want or need armed security personnel, that, of course, is a decision to be made by the parents and the local school board at the local level.

HUTCHINSON: The second point I want to make is that this will be a program that does not depend on massive funding from local authorities or the federal government. Instead, it will make use of local volunteers serving in their own communities.

In my home state of Arkansas, my son was a volunteer with a local group called Watchdog Dads (ph) who volunteer their time at schools, who patrol playgrounds and provide a measure of added security. President Clinton initiated a program called Cops In School, but the federal response is not sufficient for today’s task.

Whether they’re retired police, retired military, or rescue personnel, I think there are people in every community in this country who would be happy to serve if only someone asked them and gave them the training and certifications to do so.

The National Rifle Association is the natural obvious choice to sponsor this program. Their gun safety, marksmanship, and hunter education programs have set the standard for well over a century. Over the past 25 years, their Eddy Eagle (ph) gun safe program has taught over 26 million kids that real guns aren’t toys, and today child gun accidents are at the lowest levels ever recorded.

School safety is a complex issue with no simple, single, solution, but I believe trained, qualified, armed security is one key component among many that can provide the first line of difference as well as the last line of defense.

Again, I welcome the opportunity to serve this vital, potentially life-saving effort.

HUTCHINSON: Thank you, very much.

LAPIERRE: (inaudible) thank you.

QUESTION: Do either of you feel like any talks with...

KEENE: As I indicated...

QUESTION: ... will stop gun...

KEENE: As I indicated at the outset, this is the beginning of a serious conversation. We won’t be taking questions today, but Andrew Arulanandam, our public affairs officer, is here.

(CROSSTALK)

KEENE: We will be willing to talk to anybody beginning on Monday. A text of the speech by Wayne and Asa Hutchinson’s remarks are available at nra.org.

I want to thank all of you for being with us. And I look forward to talking to you and answering any of your questions next week.

Thank you very much.

QUESTION: One question. One question, Mr. Keene?

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: (inaudible) White House for any discussions (ph)? Mr. Keene, is the door completely closed (inaudible) White House for any discussion, sir?

[StylinRed]

sounds like the NRA won't be satisfied until it looks like this on every street corner, school, mall, arena, stadium, park, any public setting








http://radgeek.com/gt/2012/08/tampa-troops.jpg


There are already liaison officers in high shcools in the states; i'm not against them being in elementary schools either but it doesn't solve the problem imo

[rsx]

private security firms are itching to get a piece of that market for sure.

[MindBomber]

America is always looking outwards when it should be looking inwards; a fine example of that, right here:Guns for the Children (http://www.gunsforthechildren.org/). Paying attention to the firearms needs of foreign children above the those of American children who are similarly lacking. It's a travesty...

[threezero]

:facepalm:

NRA: "Only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"; suggesting schools need armed security

Only in America do you get such logic (or lack thereof)...


the only way to stop a good guy with a gun is a bad guy with a gun and body armour :troll:

[Yodamaster]

I don't like the idea of teachers packing heat, they have the job of keeping the students calm during these kinds of events, not pulling out a glock.

Kitsilano has an armed school liaison officer, I felt pretty safe knowing that during my years there.

[gars]

Someone on Reddit posted this article which points out that there was an armed deputy at Columbine. He did fire shots at one of the killers, but a trained guy with a sidearm is no match for an untrained teen with an assault rifle. Now think about some of the more recent shootings where the killers have bulletproof vests.

Daily Kos: Columbine High School had an armed deputy (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171099/-Columbine-High-School-had-an-armed-deputy)

Jefferson County Sheriff’s Deputy Neil Gardner soon would complete his second year as the uniformed community resource officer assigned to Columbine High School. Gardner, a 15-year veteran of the Sheriff’s Office, normally ate his lunch with the students in the cafeteria during first lunch period. His car would have been parked in his “normal spot” in front of the cafeteria doors - between the junior and senior parking lots.
On April 20, however, Deputy Gardner and campus supervisor Andy Marton, an unarmed school security officer employed by the school district, were eating lunch in Gardner’s patrol car. They were monitoring students in the “Smokers’ Pit,” a spot just to the northwest of campus in Clement Park where the students congregated to smoke cigarettes.

... SNIP ...

As Gardner stepped out of his patrol car, Eric Harris turned his attention from shooting into the west doors of the high school to the student parking lot and to the deputy. Gardner, particularly visible in the bright yellow shirt of the community resource officer uniform, was the target of Harris’ bullets. Harris fired about 10 shots from his rifle at Gardner before his gun jammed. Although Gardner’s patrol car was not hit by bullets, two vehicles that he was parked behind were hit by Harris’ gunfire. Investigators later found two bullet holes in each of the cars.

... SNIP ...

Gardner, seeing Harris working with his gun, leaned over the top of the car and fired four shots. He was 60 yards from the gunman. Harris spun hard to the right and Gardner momentarily thought he had hit him. Seconds later, Harris began shooting again at the deputy.

After the exchange of gunfire, Harris ran back into the building. Gardner was able to get on the police radio and called for assistance from other Sheriff’s units. “Shots in the building. I need someone in the south lot with me.”

It was 11:26 a.m. Only five minutes had passed since Jefferson County Sheriff’s dispatch center had announced a bomb explosion and subsequent fire on South Wadsworth Boulevard.

This directly addresses the idea that what we need is more armed people everywhere - schools, churches, Little League games, and so on. A police officer with a standard side arm was no match for an untrained teen with a rifle. People with concealed carry permits may be able to arm themselves against other people with concealed weapons. They will not be able to stop a Sandy Hook or Columbine or Aurora style gunman with a rifle and body armor (none at Columbine, yes at the others).
It seems likely that the madmen are learning from one another. The arms and armor of the Sandy Hook killer were similar to those of the Aurora theater shooter. A smart killer, and most of them seem to be reasonably smart, might reconnoiter the intended site before the attack. How hard would it be to buy a movie ticket to a theater and look for where the armed guards are? How hard would it have been for the Columbine killers to look for the sheriff deputy on their way into the school had he been on campus?

If you really think more guns are the answer, Louis Gohmert, then please describe how many guards, at what level of training and how heavily armed, are needed to stop a killer with a semi-automatic rifle, expert in its use, wearing body armor, and attacking with the advantage of surprise at the most vulnerable spot. Because these killers are not going to stop, some of them are going to prepare and plan.

I'd say half a dozen per elementary school, with SWAT-team armaments and armor. There are 67,000 elementary schools in the United States. Let's call it 400,000 full time guards, making perhaps $50,000 each. That's $20,000,000,000 per year just for the elementary schools. And since a smart, preparing, planning killer may just go down the street to the park, or the Little League fields, you can multiply that by a hundred or a thousand or ten thousand to protect every place. Who knows?

So, Louis, will you pay the taxes for this? Armed citizens aren't going to cut it, Louis. They never have, they probably never will. You really want to make our children safe, you need professionals.

Or ...

You can agree to keep weapons specifically designed to kill many people quickly out of the hands of ordinary citizens.

*edit* sorry, I used the term "Assault Rifle" quite loosely. They are semi-automatic rifles with high capacity magazines. While they aren't exactly assault rifles in the same sense as military weapons like the M16, etc, they are definitely not designed for hunting.

[dared3vil0]

Poor kids. :okay: