Millions of Americans have children and own guns.....and are not buying in.

reply to post by DreamerOracle


Not speaking for whom this was posted for, but if my kid turned out to be a perp, then so be it, I failed as a parent and take personal responsibility for it! I must have failed some where as a parent, and if the kid was that screwed up then perhaps they should have committed them. It is the weak hearted parent to blame. People forget - you are a PARENT! not your child's friend. Be a parent, and even then some just have evil in their hearts and should be dealt with.

Originally posted by chrismarco
reply to post by Logarock

 

That's a hard thing to say as to whether or not you would change your mind on gun control if you child was murdered by a gun...would you mind change if your child got his hands on a gun and accidentally shot himself? Say it was locked up and through something like youtube he was able to get around the lock? This decision is so difficult because although I understand the right to have a weapon we are doing a terrible job keeping these guns either off of the streets in in the hands of some lunatics....


This gentleman was or is still a member of the NRA...
Link

Wow...this link is so completely freaking biased and wrong. If we are going to tell stories that are once sided, lets make sure their are facts and not what someone wrote in a book. Yoshihiro was not shot in the house, he was not alone, and he understood english completely. Yes, all three of these facts make the story seem more in favor of strict gun laws. This should let you know that I am completely neutral in this. HOWEVER, these two situations are completely different. In once instance you had a person walk straight into a school, past so many opportunities to have been stopped, and took place over an extended period. With the situation in Louisiana, this was a chaotic time where the shooter wasn't even aware of what was going on, just instinctively reacted to his wife and what appeared to be going on. Again, lets compare apples to apples and do it with unbiased facts.

The only way to understand people's view point as well as stay fair, is to keep the facts straight and not sale your point through bull#.

I just looked at the faces of the kids that were killed and I can't imagine the pain that the family is feeling and the reminder of what this date will feel like for them the rest of their lives...it seems like their is no compromise so it's either all or nothing..I just hope what ever is done they beef up illegal handgun possession to be a bigger crime than it already is...

reply to post by humphreysjim


Ok so go on youtube or amazon and you can find every IED recipe you want. So do you ban Gasoline, dish detergent, orange juice, etc? You can kill a lot of people really fast with simple items. IT is not the gun, but the indiviual's choice of how to commit the crime they have decided to commit.

I work in security, and deal with this so don't even think of coming back on this because I work every day to ensure hundreds of people are safe via multiple threat vectors.

At the end of the day, you let people take away your rights and you will wake up a slave.

reply to post by DAVID64


For me, the issue is not guns (which I own 3)...but taking on the mental health issue. Guns did not kill those children. An insane human with access to guns did.

reply to post by humphreysjim


makes you wonder why he put on body armor and a mask then.
and didnt england lose their guns to school shooting?
and yet your robberies and rape went up and murder by gun went down but gun crime went up??
so we should follow your failed policy and maybe grow some flowers??

Agree with the OP. People know that they would gladly have exchanged an illegal handgun in the purse of a teacher for their dead child. In a heartbeat.

Careful not to respond to the hand wringing in the media about more gun control. Their fantasy about "controlling guns" isn't viable and they full well know it. The war on poverty, hunger, crime and drugs did little to actually control those problems either.

Neither will a "war on guns".

Agreed, the shootings are hoaxes, but at the same time, my sympathies towards those who died.

Just out of curiosity; who died?

Originally posted by tjack
reply to post by Logarock

 

Good on you, we are doing the same with our children as well.

Been thinking hard about this all weekend and it occurred to me, access control (to the school) and infrastructure would be a much better place to be putting our thinking and dollars than gun control.

Take away guns, and the intelligent psychotic killer with a plan to do harm will simply move to the next-most-convenient way to do so. Take that away, and then they'll choose the next thing and so on and so forth.

Killers can be very creative as has been previously demonstrated.

Think about how much money is spent each year making sure bad guys can't get out of prisons. Guards, bars, alarms, perimeter fences, etc. .

Now think about how much is spent making sure they can't get IN to a school.

Think about how much money is spent on building infrastructure to minimize the possibility of a devastating fire taking lives. Sprinklers, alarms, fire extinguishers, emergency lighting, fire doors, exit signage, DRILLS, etc. We take fire very seriously.

Now think about how much is spent with regards to "active shooters" in our schools, which to me nowadays seems more likely to occur than three-alarm fires.

We seem to spend PLENTY making sure the police departments are all equipped with the latest in military gear, so when something does happen, they're sure to show up in armored cars body armor and all that.....after the fact, but ok at least they look cool and imposing while counting the bodies.

Seems to me that we could do much more on the front end and have a much better net effect of minimizing this horrific crap rather than blaming inanimate objects and imposing even more "feel good" legislation that will again have no effect.

So your argument boils down to killers are going to kill, so we might as well make it easy for them to get high powered weapons because some gun nut might be inconvenienced? That makes zero sense.

reply to post by SweetChild



ummm....what?

I was saying we need to spend more time, energy and money "hardening the perimeter" of the places we don't want our loved ones shot up at. You know, since we spend so much making sure POLICE are fully militarized and ready to respond "after the deed is done".

That's the "back end".

I'm saying let's focus instead on the "front end", like we do with fire, where we can better effect the outcome from the start.

Not sure where you got what you got from my post, unless it was a mistake.

But yes, I definitely think that killers are going to kill. Call it a hunch.

Let me ask this...

If there is nothing wrong with carrying a gun around, what is the point of installing metal detectors to prevent people from entering certain areas with a gun?

In other words, the people who argue against gun control seem to be quick to offer up the solution which entails controlling who can and cant enter an area with a gun.

Btw, i own a gun. I just think the argument makes no sense.

ETA: on the same token, why would we fully train school staff on and equip some of them with guns when it is perfectly logical that one of THEM could snap one day and use those new skills against their coworkers and students?

My point is, theres no end-all solution to this, and i think that we need to find a mix of solutions that make the most sense no matter the poLitical orientation the person offering it aligns with. I don't know what they are, but i do know that the only way to find them is to have an open, honest debate about it instead of focusing on whether its a republican or liberal idea and getting outraged when someone offers up a solution that they HONESTLY think is the best one. Its not out of malice, its a heartfelt concern.

If your child was a victim of a shooting (I would definitely NOT wish that on anyone) I bet your views on 2nd amendment rights would change pretty fast.

Just speak to almost anyone who has lost a loved one to a shooting and see if they still support right to bear arms.

Personally, if I had a vendatta against the rest of humanity i'd use bombs to do the deed, they are much MUCH more destructive and have a tremendous psychological effect on people, esspecially if the bomber is on the loose.

In that respect i'd much rather have them use guns over IEDs since an armed citizen or police officer can shoot back at a gunman, they can't bomb them back.

reply to post by babybunnies


Actually, even if my beloved son got shot I would STILL not blame the tool that killed him.

If he got hit by a car I wouldn't hate people for owning a cars, i'd hate the driver! I sure as hell wouldn't want them to ban cars because he got hit by one!

What it boils down to is this. Are ( all) people allowed to defend themselves to the death or not? If so, then with what means, knowing what they may be up against? A stick? A rock? A baseball bat? What should be allowable knowing the bad guy has whatever he wants?

Originally posted by kozmo
Those who are driven to respond emotionally will almost completely lose their ability to respond rationally.

That is both the motive and the point. The events were tragic - do not make the mistake of buying the problem, cause, solution that is being presented by the politicians and MSM. The goal is to drive you to an emotional response. Once emotional, you are pliable and logic is what they tell you it is.

You sir are a genius. I agree with you 100%

.. and it is brilliant. sick, but brilliant.

The real solution to help crazy people

Personality order like many diseases can be cured by simple minerals like lithium
Society refuses to talk about it and assumes drugs and feeding this medical beast is a solution it's not


The drug this kid was on has a major side effect of violence

Perhaps a doctor should be put in jail over this

Originally posted by babybunnies
If your child was a victim of a shooting (I would definitely NOT wish that on anyone) I bet your views on 2nd amendment rights would change pretty fast.

Just speak to almost anyone who has lost a loved one to a shooting and see if they still support right to bear arms.

Sugar kills millions
Same as drugs....even legal ones like his mass Killer was on

You can hate the tools of evil but not wish all tools banned

Life sucks and you die.
You can't keep blaming objects for all the evil in the world.

Blame the kid
Blame the doctor who gave him such a bad phycotic episode
Blame the system of health

I don't see all these new found gun haters all up in arms over our military killing kids overseas

Originally posted by SuperTripps
The real solution to help crazy people

Personality order like many diseases can be cured by simple minerals like lithium
Society refuses to talk about it and assumes drugs and feeding this medical beast is a solution it's not


The drug this kid was on has a major side effect of violence

Perhaps a doctor should be put in jail over this

The biggest problem in this country concerning the mass shootings is not the guns. It is because our mental health system is so piss poor many people can’t get help even when they try to.

reply to post by SweetChild


If that is your honest and true take on the situation then unfortunately you're a very confused individual who has taken the anti-gun lobbyist propaganda hook, line and sinker.

Originally posted by Logarock
I have five children. If my children were to be victims like those in the school shooting I would certainly feel the same way as the parents of those children.

Having said that it wouldnt move me one bit to change my 2nd amendment convictions.

Religion has taught us that when the brain is indoctrinated at a formative age, it's near-impossible to rectify the damage. Hence why we wage war against fundamentalism as distinct from attempting to / wasting time with trying to redress it.

This 'war' should not exclude non religious fanaticism.