Shooting at small town elementry school in Conneticut

[Vic]

Graham, as stitch pointed out, the War on Drugs (oh so successfull) add as well as the historical failure of Alcohol Prohibition. What makes you think that a War on Guns is going to be anymore successfull?

[Reliant121]

Because so far it has been everywhere else. If the force in question is properly funded, properly supported by law and has enough people in the team to do it, it can be done. So far what I'm hearing is banning, collecting and destroying fire arms would be too big a task...well then, fair enough. But you've got to accept that tragedies with fire arms will happen. It happens here too, not denying that, it just happens far far far less frequently.

Ultimately this boils down to cultural differences. It seems that US citizens generallt require gun ownership to be a basic need to feel safe and secure; we view a well funded and effective police force necessary. Distance to cover, distribution of forces; I guess our police forces have to cover a fraction of the ground US ones do. I think there was a TV show documenting state troopers in Washington in which this guy was one of only 6 patrol vehicles in the entire state's highway system. There are more patrol vehicles than that in my local town office...guess perspective comes into it.

I'm rambling now. Sort of lost my point. All I can say is banning fire arms has worked elsewhere so it would logically suggest it would work over there too.

[Graham Kennedy]

We all know how well the war on drugs went. A war on guns would be just as much a failure.

Other countries seem to manage it fairly well.

Just curious, but are you for legalising drugs on the same basis that having them illegal doesn't stop them?

The US already can't collect all the current illegal weapons (as in illegally purchased/owned), what makes you think they could handle even more?

Because having something available legally in huge quantities makes it far easier to get hold of illegally too. For me to get an illegal gun it would have to be smuggled in through customs - possible, but chancy. Or it would have to be built here in some kind of secret factory - possible, but difficult. There would have to be a whole network of smugglers and gun traders working to get it to me, with the law potentially catching any one of them along the way.

For me to get an illegal gun in the US, that whole network operates in the open and above board, and then I just steal a legal gun off somebody who bought one legally. It's easier.

[Praeothmin]

I wonder if airplanes should be banned, as they were used to murder more than all of the big firearms mess in recent years combined.

Did you not notice that the response to such a murderous event was to drastically reinforce air security rules?
Did you not notice the fact that now you can't even bring nail-clippers on board an airplane in your carry-on, while you could before?

All of that because of these airplane attacks...
So, are you saying the US should follow suit and drastically reinforce the gun laws?

[Tsukiyumi]

Did you not notice that the response to such a murderous event was to drastically reinforce air security rules?
Did you not notice the fact that now you can't even bring nail-clippers on board an airplane in your carry-on, while you could before?

All of that because of these airplane attacks...
So, are you saying the US should follow suit and drastically reinforce the gun laws?

Personally, I'd say those rules were way over the top as well, and have contributed to America's transformation into a police state.

[Praeothmin]

Personally, I'd say those rules were way over the top as well, and have contributed to America's transformation into a police state.

And I would agree, although I do believe that having stricter airport security was a good thing, only not that strict...

[stitch626]

We all know how well the war on drugs went. A war on guns would be just as much a failure.

Other countries seem to manage it fairly well.

Just curious, but are you for legalising drugs on the same basis that having them illegal doesn't stop them?

Yes, other very small countries with very small borders.


And no, I'm not for legalizing drugs. For that matter, if I cared to be involved I would support banning anything beyond a six shot revolver (cause they look nice, though we could get rid of their ammo). I'm against gun ownership, but I'm also against impracticable and unfeasible suggestions.

I wonder if airplanes should be banned, as they were used to murder more than all of the big firearms mess in recent years combined.

Did you not notice that the response to such a murderous event was to drastically reinforce air security rules?
Did you not notice the fact that now you can't even bring nail-clippers on board an airplane in your carry-on, while you could before?

All of that because of these airplane attacks...
So, are you saying the US should follow suit and drastically reinforce the gun laws?

They did increase security rules. They went from having practically nothing to having something.
Also, nail clippers can still be brought on as long as they don't have a slide out file. Or at least, they haven't seem to mind on the last 3 flights I've been on.

Also, I wouldn't mind guns being banned outright, it just wouldn't work.



They other problem, mostly with a handgun ban. How would it be enforced? You can't as a cop legally walk up to someone on the street and ask to inspect their purse without a search warrant (or probable cause, which would be a mess for both sides). You can't enter someones home to check for illegal items without said warrant. People could hide tons of weapons, just like they already do with drugs... except the signs of drugs are easier to spot.


All a gun ban would do, they only thing it would do, is increase the number of illegal weapons in this country. Thats it. Many many other things would need to be done to counter such crimes as the ones of recent news, and a ban has little to do with em.

[Deepcrush]

No, it would increase the number of illegal ones. If you have a set number of guns, some legal and others not. Changing the laws so that more are illegal doesn't reduce anything.

But you don't have a set number of guns. With the ban you collect, confiscate, seize and destroy.

We all know how well the war on drugs went. A war on guns would be just as much a failure.


The US already can't collect all the current illegal weapons (as in illegally purchased/owned), what makes you think they could handle even more?

Considering that since the problem has never been legally owned firearms, taking officers off their already stretched patrols to attack law abiding citizens only leaves life easier for criminals.

[Deepcrush]

So listening to the radio, New York has decided to increase the number of No-Gun Zones. This includes using unarmed cops to patrol these areas. Only problem, one of the zones listed is in south Queens... one of the most armed areas in the state. Nice to see fear taking a big piss on reason. Now they want cops, unarmed, to go and enforce the taking of weapons from criminals who use those weapons in committing crimes.

What was really funny is that the unarmed service is volunteer based, and thus far out of 35000+ officers they haven't had a single one.

[Praeothmin]

They did increase security rules. They went from having practically nothing to having something.
Also, nail clippers can still be brought on as long as they don't have a slide out file. Or at least, they haven't seem to mind on the last 3 flights I've been on.

Lucky you!

Also, I wouldn't mind guns being banned outright, it just wouldn't work.

Well, I'm on the "more restrictions" wagon, not the "ban them all" one...
I simply believe firmer regulations would help alleviate the death tolls, and the UN's chart seems to agree for the most part...

[Deepcrush]

Really? I'd like to see that chart since from everything I've seen the death count hasn't changed much, just the causes have shifted.

[Vic]

Just an impression. The only places that seem to have gun control actually work are those where the populace is traditionally unarmed.

[McAvoy]

Just an impression. The only places that seem to have gun control actually work are those where the populace is traditionally unarmed.

Exactly.

Honestly the solution is not putting guns in schools or wherever or taking away guns but finding out why these assholes are doing this. Then fix it somehow.

[SteveK]

Hello everyone,

I've only skimmed this thread, so please forgive me if I'm reiterating the spirit of someone else's post regarding gun control.

The matter at hand is whether or not the liberty to own guns is worth the price we pay in lost lives. To the families of those who've died, I imagine the answer seems obvious. However we should consider what makes the right to own guns so worthy of particular attention. According to the FBI, of the 128 homicides in Connecticut last year, 94 were committed using a gun. It is reasonable to assume that at least some of those homicides would still have occurred even if guns were completely illegal. If we are willing to deprive the 3.5 million residents of the state firearms in response, what other measures should we take in the name of the sanctity of life?

Perhaps we should mechanically limit automobile traffic to 25 mph to reduce road deaths, or mandate universal flu vaccinations to decrease deaths among the elderly and others in poor health. What about banning junk food, or even beef cooked below well done? I don't usually think of a medium rare steak as a risk, but I'd wager that someone somewhere at sometime has died of food poisoning that could have been otherwise prevented.

Which brings me to my point. Most Americans go through their lives without being murdered or being exposed to any gun violence. The risk is out there of course, but so is the risk that I'll be killed in a car accident, or that the raw cookie dough I indulged in will be the end of me. The consensus among Americans, as voiced by our democratically established laws is that the risk of guns is light compared to the benefits, real or imagined, of owning them. We could be wrong, but owning guns has long been part of the American tradition so we've been reluctant to change.

[McAvoy]

Well drinking and driving is bad too. But no one is even seriously talking about a second Prohibition.