It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Let's discuss gun restriction using logic and reason

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:20 AM
Let's start off with me saying that I grew up in the mountains of Colorado. Almost everyone hunted back home, and if they hunt, then they had to go through hunters saftey. In fact I still have my hs card in my wallet from 1989.

I currently do not own any fire arms, but would really like to rebuild my collection. I don't hunt anymore so the main reason would be protection. There is another reason for me wanting to get mine back. I LOVE to shoot. It's therapeutic for me, its a challenge for me. It no different than a painter or gardener. It's a hobby that tests your artistry for marksmanship.

With that said. Do guns belong in schools?
Do guns need to be in schools?
Unfortunately yes.
Are kids sneaky little s.o.b's that can sneak something past a metal detector?
For sure.
Should there be a firearm available for a school's faculty?

Now we need to figure out what to do with that info. Some of these suggestions may sound stupid, but give it a thought.
Opt. 1) constant armed guards at main entrance points, and armed guards walking the halls. Any of the guards can be dressed in a uniform or civilian cloths to blend in. Weapons would be concealed, to not frighten students. If guns are the main concern, non lethal rubber bullets or bean bags could be substituted for the first few rounds in a chamber.

Opt. 2) fire arms would be placed strategically in the school(like fire extinguishers) locked up of course, but with a biometric type system so only registered individuals can have access. No one's asking school staff members to be a hero, it would not be a requirement to put yourself in harms way. It would only put an option on the table if someone felt the need to intervene.

I feel that most of these a$$holes that are shooting up schools are doing it for notoriety. I also believe that most, if not all, plan on suicide or being shot by police. If a teacher were to send a couple rounds in the shooter's direction, it may be enough to make the shooter give up and take their own life.

The only thing that I know for sure is that this isn't going to stop with stricter gun control. If you take guns out of the equation, then we'll have school stabbings, or some idiot will learn how to build a bomb or chemical weapon like chlorine gas or something. If you take guns away the only thing you'll be doing is forcing them to be creative in their mass killing.

The only thing I can think of that may help would be to cut it off at the head. Erase all materials to n all school shootings, ban media from reporting shooting details, especially the killers name. If the fame and notoriety are taken away then may the killings will slow down down

But what do I know?

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 03:50 PM
Well, if you want logic, let's analyse logically some data first.

Wikipedea ( stats says:

- Between 1990 and 2007 (17 years) the average number of shootings in school in America was 3.78 per year.
- Between 2008 (Obama's first term) and today, this avarege skyrocketed to 15.75
- If we consider only the last 4 years, i.e. from 2012 to today, the avarege is of 23.75 number of shootings in school per year (let me repeat that number: 23.75/year) .

And we are talking about the number of times someone entered a school shooting. I'm not telling number of victims here. I will not approach that subject.

Having said that, answering the following questions is paramount to find the solution for the current problem:

1) Have the number of mental illness cases 5-folded in the last 8 years compared to the last 25 years?
2) Have the number of guns 5-folded in the past 8 years?
3) Have the number of mentally-challenged people with gun access 5-folded in the past 8 years?
4) Have the number of mentally-challenged people with gun access and the will to shoot in a school 5-folded in the past years?

Now, unless you answer these critically, you will not have the right solution for the shooting-in-schools problem.

My educated guess is: there are people interested in disarming the American people, and they want you very much to believe that nowadays every other person around you is a lunatic that can easily a) get a gun, b) get a lot (looot) of ammo, and c) handle that gun properly and fast enough to make a lot of victims before being stopped; and these people also wish you to believe that this mentally challenged person is lurking somewhere and will anytime soon enter your school shooting, and then he/she will be killed by the police or suicide.

(oh let's add one more thing? Let's be clear that this mentally challenged person (a very angry one), who is smart enough to get a gun, ammo, handle the gun properly always happen to be a male. Good, at least we know females are incapable of getting angry, getting guns or getting at the school to shoot kids.)

It can't get more logical than that. Because if that is not the answer, boy!, America is being victimized by a very sick drinking water in the past 10 years or so, that affects only males but y'all becoming crazy zombies.

My 2-cent.

edit on 5-10-2015 by tsctsc because: added thing

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:07 PM
a reply to: Maxatoria

I shot guns at 5 years old... I also cleaned the fish I caught.

Sadly, the 4 year old neighbor girl could clean fish faster and better than me. She still can and we're pushing 40.

What's your problem with kids?

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 04:08 PM
Well... maybe we should start by controlling crime and drugs. Poverty seems to play a big part of this, maybe we can eliminate poverty too. Crime and drugs can be eliminated by allowing the government to monitor all of us in public and private places, honestly, does anyone really care about the fourth and sixth amendments? Obviously, the Bill of Rights is the real culprit.

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 05:02 PM
a reply to: seaswine

Would you also mandate a mental health evaluation before one speaks, or buys a book, or attends a religious service?

Who would decide what government accepts as a mental illness? Is distrust of government now a mental illness in your little world?

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 06:25 PM

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 07:31 PM
a reply to: seaswine

I welcome this discussion, and I believe that the number one mistake people make in any conflict is to assume other people's motivations. For example, one of the first responders to your post labeled people that don't have their view as selfish.

I believe that questions important to this discussion would be:
1. Do people have equal rights?
2. Do collectives of people have the same rights as the people who are members of them?
3. Under what circumstances is it justified to take away the property of others?
4. What is the difference between public and private property in terms of allowing people to do as they please?
5. Should government organizations have the same restrictions on weapons as those who have agree to abide by their laws?
6. What gives government authority over individuals? (ie consent).

If people have equal rights, why do I not have the right to a tank, while other people, like in the US military, do have the right to a tank. I believe what gives government authority over individuals, is the individual consent of those individuals. Good consent means a signed contract with substantial negotiating power on both sides. I believe a sign of entirely non-existent consent would be suggesting I've been volunteered by the founding fathers of the US to consent to the laws of the USA hundreds of years before I was born.

My preference would be a contract that gives the government no more ability to own a gun, a tank, or a nuclear weapon, than I have. I don't think *anyone* should have a nuclear weapon. In fact, I don't want the US government owning one, and I don't want them owning one any more than a random bum on the street, as I really do believe they are equally trustworthy with nuclear weapons.

I believe there should be explosives restrictions regardless of who is in possession (including government organizations), which would be explosives that indiscriminately destroys everything greater than 500 meters away. In that way, the recent incident in China may have been avoided. I see no reason to say "firearm" because its not what you call it or what it is designed to do that is important so much as what it actually is used for and what it actually does that is important.

So, I think it is fair game to confiscate and then promptly eliminate any nuclear weapons from anyone (or any organization) at all who has one. Given that this is an arbitrary line of force I've drawn, I understand that less libertarian people have a different line in the sand to draw. However, we have irreconcilable differences because they are doing what I consider to be in violation of my property rights. I suppose I can be convinced about other especially devastating weapons as well.

The solution to these differences like firearms restriction would be to ensure people can access an area of the world where they can go where they are allowed to *take away and destroy* any firearm, knife, sharp scissors, large pebble, or whatever it is they deem too dangerous. I suggest that place to be somewhere in China. Then maybe have some place in the USA, maybe Texas, where you can have absolutely any weapon up to and including nukes.

The left and the right have an entirely different way of life, an entirely different philosophy, and an entirely different culture. So, they should not live together in most cases. They should voluntarily, at their own pace, vote with their feet. I suppose few people have considered this idea, but personally I've already moved, and am *tons* happier as a result. If you don't like your living situation, moving is very often the best option!

City life is for liberals I've discovered. They want to control what weapons people can and can't have down to fine details, and also they want to control and micromanage every aspect over everything in general. In New York City thats essentially how it is. NYC is an authoritarians utopia except in the area of speech control. And, it seems to work for them. I guess they are wealthy and happy there under the rule of their benevolent overlords. But, I find it detestable, and I moved to a place where I'm not hassled over basically anything. I love it, and I love the people around me. There are thousands of intentional communities, and they are all worth taking a look at for someone who isn't happy with the system they are under. Personally I have chosen the "Live Free or Die" state and for a libertarian who also has the economic environment as a priority, its a good choice.

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 07:57 PM
Arm kids with gun.

This way they will kill themselves over petty fights and we dont have to worry about "lone gun man" killing them.

Smart... put this idea beside "asking a 5 yr old what he wants to eat for dinner."

Why does states with stricter gun law have fewer death?
Why are there high shooting in states with most gun?( i know, its common sense but gotta ask) why arent the armed citizen stopping these killers? shouln't these states have low shooting rate if the theory "more guns less shooting" were true.

More cars more car accidents.
More guns more gun shooting.

Not sure why gun owners are not for stricter laws? Guess they want all the mentally unstable kids to get gun "unfringed".
Its not about taking away your guns but restricting any crazy or paranoid individual from causing massive destruction or at the very least make it harder for them to go thru with the plan.
edit on 10/5/2015 by luciddream because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 08:09 PM
a reply to: seaswine

The problem is that everyone thinks this is a new thing.

January 12, 1910: New York City, "A black bearded maniac drew an automatic pistol" and fired five shots into a crowd of the Harlem School boys. The kids were taunting him, so he shot into the crowd of children. Robert Lomas, aged 6, was hit in the heart and died instantly, Arthur Shively also aged 6 was shot through the left lung and critically wounded.[71]
March 10, 1910: Ione, California, At the reform school, Preston School of Industry, students Albert Brown and Eugene Griffin tried to escape as they stole a revolver from the school's bakery shop. They then shot at Captain William H. White as he was in pursuit. No one was hurt, but the two boys were no longer welcome at the school and were sent to the penitentiary.[72]
August 16, 1910: Lexington, Kentucky, A general fight broke out during school elections where Lewis Napier was shot and killed and several others hurt. Several were arrested.[73]
April 27, 1911: Manhattan, Kansas, During a school play rehearsal, a revolver was accidentally loaded by a boy who tried to shoot a bird with it the day before. When the girl was to use the firearm as written in the script, she picked it up, then laid it down saying she was afraid of the old thing. The Teacher, Miss Reedy then grabbed the gun and said there was no need for alarm and pointed it at the girl, Pearl Reedy, 18 years old, and squeezed the trigger. The bullet lodged near her heart fatally wounding her[74]
January 10, 1912: Warrenville, Illinois, Sylvester E. Adams shot and killed teacher Edith Smith after she rejected his advances. Adams then shot and killed himself. The incident took place in a schoolhouse after the students had been dismissed for the day.[75] A month later the students refused to go back to the school saying it was haunted by ghosts, so the little schoolhouse was torn down and a new one was built.[76]
January 31, 1912: San Francisco, California, In a brawl between the white and Chinese students at the Oriental School, James Kane was shot dead.[77]
January 17, 1913: Honolulu, Hawaii, While the children in the schoolhouse were quietly seated, Manuel Fernandez entered the classroom and shot his wife, the teacher, Johanna Fernandez killing her with a shotgun. Seven of the children were hit by the scattering buckshot, dangerously wounding one. He then shot and killed himself. Jealousy is quoted as the motive.[78]
January 9, 1914: Madison, Wisconsin, John Spooner, 40 years old, son of U.S. Ambassador, Roger C. Spooner, and nephew of Senator John C. Spooner went to the Madison school, then called teacher Miss Emily McConnell, 35 years old, to the hallway, and without conversation, shot and killed her with a revolver. Then, turned the gun on himself, leaving a wife and two children behind. John, had become infatuated with his wife's friend four years earlier and pursued her relentlessly. Emily's mother called the school everyday to check on her as she was awaiting a transfer to Bermuda Islands. She was to leave the day she was killed.[79]
March 1, 1914: Alpine, Texas, Jesse Morgan, escaped jail Saturday afternoon after being arrested for highway robbery. He bit, knocked down, and grabbed the sheriff's gun while being fed dinner. He started running towards the empty school house as being pursued. He held up in the school house, where he fired off 12 shots. The posse returned fire and killed Jesse. He had 30 shots to his body, and the school was riddled with damage to the windows and woodwork.[80]
November 19, 1914 Sayre, Pennsylvania, While walking to school, Charles Listman, 14, shot and killed Andrew Milton, 15, over the affections of classmate Minnie London, 13.[81]
January 13, 1915: Vancouver, Washington, During a parent-teachers' meeting, student Murlan Decker (15), was accidentally shot by his younger brother, Luther.[82]
September 22, 1916: Grand Rapids, Minnesota, Miss Olga Dahl, the 19-year-old teacher at the Round Lake District School, was found the next day, tied to a tree near the school, assaulted and shot twice in the face. Miss Dahl was working late after all the pupils had gone home, when a man with a revolver entered the school house and ordered her to keep quiet and obey his orders. She was not expected to live, and all available men in Itasca County joined in the hunt for the assailant.[83]
December 26, 1916: Danville, Kentucky, During the Christmas tree celebration at the Harris Creek School with a packed room of children and visitors, a fight broke out. No one knows who fired the first shot, but William Benedict, Sr. was instantly shot dead; William Benedict, Jr. was shot in the ankle; Bourdon Galloway was shot in the right arm; and Mike Gaddis was shot in the leg. Many others were injured fleeing the bullets by diving out windows and ducking under seats. It was said that the disturbance was created by Thomas Thornton, who had been drinking and was told to calm down Benedict, when Thomas' brother George left and returned with a revolver.[84]
January 18, 1917: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, At the Wheeler school building, teacher Miss Neilie M. Dunn was shot dead in the hall by a masked man in front of teachers and students. The shooter then left the school and went to the music studio and shot dead Rowland D. Williams the vocal teacher. The two were reportedly romantically involved. Mr. John M. Couch, Brother of former Captain W William Lewis Couch also Neilie's brother-in-law was arrested, as his motive was jealousy, even though he was married to Dunn's sister.[85]
June 5, 1917: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Earl Wolf, a 16-year-old freshman, was accidentally shot in the leg with a revolver around noon time, in the company of his classmates at the Central High School.[86]
September 17, 1917: Hartington, Nebraska, Teacher, Miss Cora Huntz, was murdered by Frank Faust on the steps of the school house with four shots to the head. Faust then fled into a corn field and shot himself to death.[87] He was a rejected suitor, who worked for her father's farm.[88]
November 29, 1918: Manes, Missouri, At the Perkins school's Thanksgiving night pie supper, teacher Joe Todd, age 21, was mysteriously shot. The bullet passes through his body, but is expected to recover.[89]

This isn't even a complete list from the 1910's.

I haven't looked at other countries, but just looking at American history, this has been happening for a long time. Some idiot lawmakers in DC won't solve the problem.
edit on 5-10-2015 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 08:29 PM
IMO the OP is not even qualified to have this discussion. Anyone who does not recognize this fact and why is also not qualified to have this discussion. This is the problem between the left and right on this issue. The left simply does not understand the principles of freedom or personal responsibility. Combine this with a propensity for lying and we arrive at where we are today.

posted on Oct, 5 2015 @ 08:32 PM
a reply to: boymonkey74

Don't be silly. Everyone knows to carry a firearm in public legally in most states requires a CCL and you have to be 21 to carry a handgun. No one is talking about arming kids, so if you want to have a real discussion, then I suggest you don't throw out garbage like that.

Gun Free Zones are nothing but a target for a madman. Most guns used in crimes in this country have been brought from Asia, and once they have a decent level of forensic criminal activity associated with the firearm, then the firearms are moved to central america where there isn't any real control.

So the vast majority of crimes are not with handguns purchased legally in the United States. The problem is you cannot control firearms illegally entering this country. Now we could have stronger punishment for individuals who use a firearm to commit a crime. How about murder with a firearm equals the death penalty. We are so often compared with Australia but they kill almost as many criminals per year as our country and they are under 10% the percentage of our population.

The answer on who to arm is simple. Any Veteran that served at least 1 tour with a clean mental bill of health from the military should be able to conceal carry a firearm anywhere in the US without a CCL. That includes on any property. They served our country and served us well. Sorry to anyone with PTSD, I know a lot of people with that and tramatic brain injury, but I would exclude them from carrying in public for now.

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 03:34 AM
When this is how your country has to act, to protect itself from it's citizens, it has HUGE problems.

Americans will have killed 450,000 people on American soil between 2001 and the end of 2015.

Over 30,000 people - 3,000 kids - are killed with guns on a yearly basis. That's the equivalent to a 9/11 every 33 days or so.

Your suicide rate is double that of the UK (at least).

In the last 8 years over 60M NEW guns have been sold.

These sorts of numbers have literally been happening for decades.

And spree shooting mates up a TINY percentage of the total numbers overall.

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 04:47 AM

originally posted by: seaswine
First off, sorry if this is wrong forum... Still pretty new here.

I grew up around guns. Own guns, and will always own guns. That being said, I personally believe things DO need to change.

Some ideas include:

When someone purchases a long-arm for the first time, they attend a general safety, use and proper storage technique.

The people that run that course should also be trained to observe individuals and look for any obvious red flags. It is fairly easy to discern mentally unfit people through a few conversations. Obviously this won't work all the time, but it would uncover SOME crazies.

All children's curriculum should include, at some point a week or so of gun safety and what to do if you find a gun etc..

Every school should also have at least one teacher, preferably with some sort of firearms knowledge, undergo vigorous training and crisis management training, and after that be given a firearm inside a lockbox, and bullets that he hides in a separate place only be knows about. Not only is this a good last resort option, but if a potential shooter knows there is a "good guy" with a gun nearby, this should deter them.

I personally hate this one myself, but I find it unfortunately necessary with societies growing crazies...
A recent (within a couple weeks or so) clean bill of mental health for anyone purchasing a handgun. I know I know, it sucks but it should happen.

I could go on, but just wanted to get the ball rolling. I welcome all opinions and arguments so long as you use logic. You don't have to be Spock to see things like "take all them guns!!" Is well... "Simply illogical captain".

Much love and good vibes!!!

Most of this we use to have.

Look at most schools built before the 70's. Almost ALL of them had a rifle range. Why was this? Because you had JrROTC, Boy Scouts, FFA (Future Farmers of America) and a host of other clubs in the schools. Almost all of them had a course on gun safety and had firearms classes. That is no longer the case.

I see no issue in having a class given in school on basic fire arms safety. It could be given in health class. After all if they can teach sex in school why not safety?

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 04:56 AM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: seaswine

Good luck actually attempting to solve the problem you guys have but expect lots of selfish "shall not be infringed" points because at the end of the day many don't care as long as they can keep their guns.
Better mental health screening and education about mental health should be a start to be honest.

Well they do have a point. The 2nd is very plain on this. "shall not be infringed" is very direct and has very little room for interpretation. I believe the Founding Father did that for a very good reason. They also felt strongly about it and made it the 2nd, right after freedom of speech and religion.

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 04:57 AM

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Could we just start by banning gun free zones?


posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 05:01 AM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Bluntone22

So arming the kids that is your answer? a school full of armed kids?.
Or am I wrong with my assumption?.

Why does everybody always jump to the extreme? Using your theory all the kids should immediately engage in a class orgy because they had a sex education class.

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 05:48 AM

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: seaswine
From the psychological standpoint who decides whats a dangerous state of mind and what isn't? What's one mans nutter is another mans freedom fighter. Yes there are the clear cut schizophrenics, but there are far more borderline cases and then there are those that successfully hide their mental states.
Also there was a proven study not too long ago that proved the majority of successful business people, CEO s and such like, had the same psychological make up as cold blooded killers ie. pathalogical tendencies.
There is always a fine line between genius and mental illness, it's just how you define either.
Here's a silly question for you. Why is there no call to dis-arm the police first? I would think the majority of cases the police attend there are no fire-arms involved so why carry permanently? Could the answer be just in case, for that one case that the criminal is armed. Then that same answer could be used for the ordinary citizen, Just in case.

They could be like the old joke about the British police:

"Stop! Or I'll yell Stop again."

Of course most the police I've seen in Briton the last few years are all armed. Umm wonder why...

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 06:01 AM

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Bluntone22

Can you show that any of the targets were chosen just because they were gun free zones or do the shooters generally have some sort of connection to the target?

Umm I will bet the people had connections with lots of places. So why did they all JUST happen to pick the one place they were pretty sure no one was armed?

Why not the neighborhood they lived in?
- Easy access
- know location and traffic pattern
- no issues being caught transporting the firearms
- BIG chance someone would come out the front door and pop them after they started.

Why not the local restaurant they eat or work at?
- Many of the same plus and add lots more people in a confined area.
- also WAY bigger chance someones armed.

Why not just down town on the street?
- Same issue - the pesky concealed firearms hold ready to blow them away.

Nice safe "Gun Free Zone'?
- not a lot of chance for a CC person
- lots of targets
- lots of "terror"

People that plan normally plan for most impact and least resistance. If it was a spur of the moment idea then it could be any where

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 06:04 AM

originally posted by: BelowBottomSecret

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Bluntone22

So arming the kids that is your answer? a school full of armed kids?.
Or am I wrong with my assumption?.

There where shotguns all over the parking lot of my high school, and nobody got shot.

Sorry, but, that is very hard to believe, and even if true, then it's very, VERY irresponsible.

What so hard to believe.

Happened all the time when I was kid to.

Every pickup had a rifle rake in the back and almost all had shotguns or rifles.

We also "GASP" had a rifle range in the school and had shooting as part of our PT classes if you wanted it.

posted on Oct, 6 2015 @ 06:09 AM

originally posted by: Maxatoria
a reply to: Bluntone22

why technically can't 5 year olds run around with guns? they're citizens and theres nothing in the 2nd that puts an age limit on owning a gun as far as i can see.....could make the playground a much more respectful place when you try and steal someones shiny charizard card and you get a .50 cal in the face

Your crazy.

A .50 would knock a 5 year old on his A$$. You need to start with something like a .22.

I started shooting ab out 9-10 if I remember right. We always had guns in the house. I have 3 brother and 2 sisters. We were all taught gun safety and to respect them. None of us as ever managed to shoot ourselves or anyone else by accident.

By the way free lesson.
We were always taught that a gun is ALWAYS loaded, even if you know its not. So, no they are not toys even if you unload them.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in