2 dead in school shooting in Nevada

Guy:Incognito · 22-10-2013 12:42AM

P_1 wrote: »

First time wading into the gun control debate so apologies for any misplaced assumptions in advance...

I take it there's no licencing system for owning guns in the states? Perhaps it might be time to do so. As part of this licencing system you have to show that you have somewhere secure to store the guns (a registration number from the safe perhaps?). Maybe add an excise type tax on the sale of guns and bullets with the money being spent on a massive education program that basically says 'just don't go around shooting people, it isn't exactly sporting good chap'.

I dont tjink people that murder others do it because no one thought to tell them not too.

Witcher · 22-10-2013 12:42AM

SeaDaily wrote: »

What are you on about?

Read the guy's post.....

Maybe add an excise type tax on the sale of guns and bullets with the money being spent on a massive education program that basically says 'just don't go around shooting people, it isn't exactly sporting good chap'.

MadsL · 22-10-2013 12:43AM

P_1 wrote: »

First time wading into the gun control debate so apologies for any misplaced assumptions in advance...

I take it there's no licencing system for owning guns in the states? Perhaps it might be time to do so. As part of this licencing system you have to show that you have somewhere secure to store the guns (a registration number from the safe perhaps?). Maybe add an excise type tax on the sale of guns and bullets with the money being spent on a massive education program that basically says 'just don't go around shooting people, it isn't exactly sporting good chap'.

Second Amendment lovers are placated, the anti-gun lobby is also placated and Uncle Sam gets his cut. Everyone wins right?

Second Amendment "lovers" would be up in arms (ahem) at a licencing system. And taxing guns? Oh boy.

abff wrote: »

Do I need to have a comprehensive gun control plan in order to be entitled to express an opinion on the subject?

Nope, but until you at least express some suggestions it is little more than hand-wringing.

P_1 · 22-10-2013 12:44AM

Blay wrote: »

There would be 300 million firearms out there under the radar, which the US government has no control over..absolutely 0. So any gun control has to restrict new sales in some way while simultaneously grandfathering 300m firearms which can be sold privately...that's unworkable.

I'm sure people like James Holmes and Adam Lanza would really have been turned around by your educational program.

Well it wouldn't be an easy process but something does need to be done about the 300 million unregistered guns. Isn't there the ATF in the states (or has that become the DEA, I can't keep up with all the acronyms lately) who's budget could be beefed up through a levy on legit sales that, combined with a registration process could cut down on this number?

theblaqueguy wrote: »

It's a terrible tragedy rip to the victims

What if they installed metal detectors in every school so children or people couldn't smuggle guns into the school and shoot innocent people

The only problem is who would pay or fund them to be installed

If memory serves me right, a lot (obviously not all) of schools in the states have already implemented this

Guy:Incognito · 22-10-2013 12:45AM

As much as I dislike michael moore , do I remember a stat from one of his "documentaries" about canada having as many guns per capita as the us?

Paddy Fields · 22-10-2013 12:45AM

MadsL wrote: »

Great idea. Except there are 300 million that have already been bought.

Ehhhhhhhh, yeah I've been there and I know. However I applaud your defence of the 1791 right to bear arms and let's just brush shooting 20 kids in Sandy Hook under the carpet. It might never happen again eh.

theblaqueguy · 22-10-2013 12:46AM

Blay wrote: »

What stops the shooter killing the guy working the metal detector and continuing on?

Have him stationed in a room close to the metal detector watching the people go through it and if the alarm goes off he or she goes out gun drawn at the potential shooter so s/he can take him out before he starts shooting

P_1 · 22-10-2013 12:47AM

MadsL wrote: »

Second Amendment "lovers" would be up in arms (ahem) at a licencing system. And taxing guns? Oh boy.

Oops, as I said apologies in advance for any incorrect assumptions. I take it I rather spectacularly made an ass of both u and me so?

SeaDaily · 22-10-2013 12:50AM

MadsL wrote: »

Second Amendment "lovers" would be up in arms (ahem) at a licencing system. And taxing guns? Oh boy.

Nope, but until you at least express some suggestions it is little more than hand-wringing.

I cant really understand where you're coming from in any of your posts. You seem to be suggesting that guns aren't a problem in America. If this isn't what you're saying how about you stop shooting down everyone else's ideas for how to stop killings like this happening and actually come up with some of your own?

Balaclava1991 · 22-10-2013 12:50AM

hfallada wrote: »

2 Americans die and there is a fresh thread about it on boards on how terrible it is( it's ridculous that thousands of innocent children have died in schools. A place that they should feel safe).

Yet 100,000 have died in Syria so far and millions have flees the country. Millions are in tents all over the country and in Lebanon and turkey. But yet the west couldn't careless.

Still In 2013 not all human life is valued equally

How many of the Syrian people had access to firearms before the Arab Spring?

If every Syrian household had an AR-15 or AK-47 there would probably never have been a tyrannical Assad regime nor would the Al-Qaeda crazies who are also tearing the country to pieces would never have been able to slaughter so many Christians, Shia, Alawites and other minorities.

The KKK, the American Nazi Party, the American Communist Party, the Weather Underground, the Mafia and McCarthyite thugs were never able to take over America because Joe Citizen had access to firearms.

That's the American way.

Crazies are going to be crazies and they are going to get their hands on guns, law or no law.

The average American citizen has the right to bear arms, to protect their property and to protect their life and liberty.

MadsL · 22-10-2013 12:51AM

P_1 wrote: »

Well it wouldn't be an easy process but something does need to be done about the 300 million unregistered guns. Isn't there the ATF in the states (or has that become the DEA, I can't keep up with all the acronyms lately) who's budget could be beefed up through a levy on legit sales that, combined with a registration process could cut down on this number?

300 million? How high would we need to raise the debt ceiling to go around writing serial numbers down in a little book. And how would the little book help?

Paddy Fields wrote: »

Ehhhhhhhh, yeah I've been there and I know. However I applaud your defence of the 1791 right to bear arms and let's just brush shooting 20 kids in Sandy Hook under the carpet. It might never happen again eh.

1791? The 2nd Amendment is currently in force in 2013. Is the right to the inviolability of the Irish citizen's home also some archaic principle from 1937?

theblaqueguy wrote: »

Have him stationed in a room close to the metal detector watching the people go through it and if the alarm goes off he or she goes out gun drawn at the potential shooter so s/he can take him out before he starts shooting

Ah, gotta love movie scripts...

Witcher · 22-10-2013 12:53AM

P_1 wrote: »

Well it wouldn't be an easy process but something does need to be done about the 300 million unregistered guns. Isn't there the ATF in the states (or has that become the DEA, I can't keep up with all the acronyms lately) who's budget could be beefed up through a levy on legit sales that, combined with a registration process could cut down on this number?

There's nothing that can be done about them, they're out of the reach of the government. Any new gun control in the US would basically have to be built on the assumption that those firearms don't even exist because they can't be touched.

The new legislation would be completely undermined from the outset because those existing firearms could be bought and sold privately with no controls.

As is always stated on this issue..the cat is out of the bag in the US..the problem can't be solved by bringing the hammer down on firearms..it just can't. You could say that from tomorrow all new firearms must be kept in a safe or they'll be taken back because we're registering where all firearms are now..bottom line..and maybe some people would live by that rule but there's X how many owners out there with 300m firearms between them who wouldn't and you couldn't force them to.

The government here could bring in any new legislation they wished on firearms because they could just come around and sweep up all the legally held firearms, as is their right and say..that's the end of private ownership of firearms in Ireland. That can't be done in the US.

P_1 · 22-10-2013 12:54AM

MadsL wrote: »

300 million? How high would we need to raise the debt ceiling to go around writing serial numbers down in a little book. And how would the little book help?

To be honest, it probably wouldn't stop a nutjob getting their hands on one if they really tried. I dunno, I guess I was applying the principle of licencing and registering cars to gun ownership.

Wompa1 · 22-10-2013 12:55AM

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

Because everyone knows that criminals obey gun laws?:rolleyes:

It's those damn immigrants!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55sjaEDJ65k

MadsL · 22-10-2013 12:56AM

SeaDaily wrote: »

I cant really understand where you're coming from in any of your posts. You seem to be suggesting that guns aren't a problem in America. If this isn't what you're saying how about you stop shooting down everyone else's ideas for how to stop killings like this happening and actually come up with some of your own?

Have laws against shooting people. [✓]

To be done
Stop splashing the name and picture of the shooter across every news bulletin.
Stop running news on shooting incidents 24/7
Stop publishing body counts
Stop interviewing survivors on TV.

MadsL · 22-10-2013 12:57AM

P_1 wrote: »

To be honest, it probably wouldn't stop a nutjob getting their hands on one if they really tried. I dunno, I guess I was applying the principle of licencing and registering cars to gun ownership.

How does having a licence plate on your car prevent road deaths?

SeaDaily · 22-10-2013 12:58AM

MadsL wrote: »

Have laws against shooting people. [✓]

Well these laws are already in place but they obviously aren't enough.

Paddy Fields · 22-10-2013 12:59AM

MadsL wrote:

1791? The 2nd Amendment is currently in force in 2013. Is the right to the inviolability of the Irish citizen's home also some archaic principle from 1937?

Nicely brushed under the carpet... Carry on. You're doing a great job. What's a few dead kids compared to your right to have a gun eh?

abff · 22-10-2013 12:59AM

MadsL wrote: »

Nope, but until you at least express some suggestions it is little more than hand-wringing.

Did you actually read what I said? Please tell me exactly where I indulged in hand-wringing.

I acknowledged that there is a major legacy issue but made the point that just because you can't find a complete solution doesn't mean that you shouldn't look for a partial solution.

I don't know what that solution is (or even if there is one) but that does not make it invalid to suggest that it might be worthwhile looking for one.

Sunglasses Ron · 22-10-2013 12:59AM

TeddyTedson wrote: »

And these storys will continue to happen until they get some decent gun control laws in place. How many more shootings will they wait for before doing something :mad:

Forever.

One of the Sandy Hook deceased teachers families requested they be left out of any anti gun campaign as they still fully support a system that allows military weapons to be within arms reach of mentally ill family members. You could gun down the entire family of some of the Tea Party/ NRA mob and they would still insist the right to bear their arms is sacrosanct.

MadsL · 22-10-2013 01:00AM

SeaDaily wrote: »

Well these laws are already in place but they obviously aren't enough.

Hence my rules to control media hype and instant fame creation of shooters. Better not to name them, or the number of victims and limit news coverage. One headline every 4 hours.

"There has been a shooting in Denver...now the weather"

We have to stop giving fame to assh*les who want fame. (also an argument for ending X-factor)

P_1 · 22-10-2013 01:00AM

MadsL wrote: »

Have laws against shooting people. [✓]

To be done
Stop splashing the name and picture of the shooter across every news bulletin.
Stop running news on shooting incidents 24/7
Stop publishing body counts
Stop interviewing survivors.

Interesting idea, roughly similar to how suicides are treated in the media in Ireland and the UK (I have no idea how US networks report them mind). Controversial now, but I can't see that idea working in practice. Judging by the ammount of coverage that they seem to get it does seem that the US public has an almost macabre fascination with these shootings, hence the high viewership of them and further hence more advertising revenue for the networks. Can you see the networks cutting themselves off from that cash cow by ditching the coverage?

MadsL · 22-10-2013 01:01AM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Forever.

One of the Sandy Hook deceased teachers families requested they be left out of any anti gun campaign as they still fully support a system that allows military weapons to be within arms reach of mentally ill family members. You could gun down the entire family of some of the Tea Party/ NRA mob and they would still insist the right to bear their arms is sacrosanct.

Wut?

Wompa1 · 22-10-2013 01:01AM

MadsL wrote: »

Have laws against shooting people. [✓]

To be done
Stop splashing the name and picture of the shooter across every news bulletin.
Stop running news on shooting incidents 24/7
Stop publishing body counts
Stop interviewing survivors on TV.

A lot more could be done. It's a joke.

Piers Morgan is the worst person to articulate a better gun regulation agenda. But what about Mr. Jeffries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4i7e3gZ1MY

Balaclava1991 · 22-10-2013 01:01AM

Wompa1 wrote: »

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

Because everyone knows that criminals obey gun laws?:rolleyes:

It's those damn immigrants!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55sjaEDJ65k

The entire American population - except for Native Americans - are immigrants.

It makes no difference if a criminal is born U.S. citizen four or five generations removed from Edinburgh, Bratislava, Hamburg, Donegal or Naples or if he just came over the border from Mexico 24 hours ago, if he is a criminal he is not going to let a law stop him from getting a gun.

Gun laws restrict the right of Joe or Jane Public to protect himself or herself.

Cops will respond in time to take pictures of your cold bullet holed corpse if you have to depend on them for protection.

P_1 · 22-10-2013 01:01AM

MadsL wrote: »

How does having a licence plate on your car prevent road deaths?

It doesn't, but having to pass a driving test does.

MadsL · 22-10-2013 01:02AM

P_1 wrote: »

Interesting idea, roughly similar to how suicides are treated in the media in Ireland and the UK (I have no idea how US networks report them mind). Controversial now, but I can't see that idea working in practice. Judging by the ammount of coverage that they seem to get it does seem that the US public has an almost macabre fascination with these shootings, hence the high viewership of them and further hence more advertising revenue for the networks. Can you see the networks cutting themselves off from that cash cow by ditching the coverage?

It has been stated over and over again, not to do exactly what the networks do do.

I have no idea if it would be easier to curtail the fourth estate than institute restrictive gun control, but I think it may be more effective.

Balaclava1991 · 22-10-2013 01:04AM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Forever.

One of the Sandy Hook deceased teachers families requested they be left out of any anti gun campaign as they still fully support a system that allows military weapons to be within arms reach of mentally ill family members. You could gun down the entire family of some of the Tea Party/ NRA mob and they would still insist the right to bear their arms is sacrosanct.

An AR-15 - weapon used by Adam Lanza - is not a military rifle.

It is a semi-automatic .223 weapon.

An M-16 is capable of fully automatic fire.

There is an important difference.

P_1 · 22-10-2013 01:05AM

MadsL wrote: »

It has been stated over and over again, not to do exactly what the networks do do.

I have no idea if it would be easier to curtail the fourth estate than institute restrictive gun control, but I think it may be more effective.

First Amendment vs Second Amendment, tough sell either way mind

MadsL · 22-10-2013 01:07AM

P_1 wrote: »

It doesn't, but having to pass a driving test does.

No joyriders underage in the US killing anyone?

2 dead in school shooting in Nevada

Comments