Connecticut shooting, gun control laws?

[BarDulL]

Link to original post: [drupal=5480]Connecticut shooting, gun control laws?[/drupal]

For those who don't already know, there was a shooting in Connecticut at a local elementary school earlier today. 20 children, ranging from ages 5 to 10, were murdered alongside 6 adults (one of them was the principal of the school). One of the two gunmen responsible for this event is believed to have committed suicide, probably out of guilt, on the school grounds while the other gunmen is still missing.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/14/shooting-reported-at-connecticut-elementary-school/?hpt=hp_t1

Now, this is an obvious tragedy to befall our country, alongside other various senseless killings that have occurred. Aurora, Colorado comes to mind, when an individual decided to shoot several people in a movie theater. That too was pretty damn senseless.

Anyway, so there are a lot of people whom, in immediate response to this event, yelled "IMPLEMENT GUN CONTROL LAWS!"

What I want to say is, is that I don't think gun control laws will solve the problem at its core. HOWEVER, I will certainly concede that implementing gun control laws will definitely promote less opportunities for individuals to decide to randomly shoot civilians on the premise that they won't have a gun when the time comes to make that random decision. Moving on...

The reason why I don't think gun control laws will necessarily fix the problem is because I've heard about underground markets that sell unregistered firearms. There are also undoubtedly a lot of unregistered firearms that are already in circulation anyway because making a gun isn't a mystery. In fact, you can actually look up how to make a gun via your standard online search engine. The other thing is, is that guns aren't the only lethal weapons available, as typical household products can be used to make lethal poisons as well as bombs (Columbine comes to mind). Knives, swords, and other various objects can also be used as weapons to harm people. So that kinda leaves us with the question of "well, then how do we respond to this tragedy as a nation?"

I'm not really sure what the proper solution to this issue is, because frankly people should have every right to be able to defend themselves and their family in the event that there is a break-in of sorts. Needless to say that guns are very efficient at accomplishing this task, and to substantiate my point a bit, here's an event that happened THIS YEAR:

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/01/05/young-mother-defends-self-and-baby-kills-intruder/

If that mother hadn't had the gun she had at the time, I doubt she would have been able to successfully defend herself against two grown men with 12 inch knives. So, to come full circle, I feel that the solution to the issue at hand has more to do with human nature and not necessarily the guns themselves, but unfortunately I don't really have an answer for human nature at this point in time.

Anyway, I guess my BIG point is that this isn't such a black and white issue, and while implementing more gun control laws seems like the right play, that may not actually be the case, so everyone should give it some more thought before jumping to conclusions.

So, what do you guys think? How should this nation respond to the recent killings? Are gun control laws really the solution, or is there perhaps a better way to handle violence in general? Are guns even the real issue, or is it violence in general?

 

[Luigitoilet]

Really? I've seen way more people go "OH GREAT NOW OBAMA IS GONNA USE THIS TO TAKE ALL OUR GUNS AWAY" than "hey maybe we should do something about the gun availability laws in this country"

and both of those way more than the thing people SHOULD be saying

"we need to look at the state of mental health institutions in this country"

 

[Yodery]

Prohibition does nothing. "The War on Drugs" is proof of that.

 

[Luigitoilet]

if only those little kids had guns this could have been avoided

 

[Yodery]

if only those little kids had guns this could have been avoided

... u wot m8

 

[BarDulL]

Really? I've seen way more people go "OH GREAT NOW OBAMA IS GONNA USE THIS TO TAKE ALL OUR GUNS AWAY" than "hey maybe we should do something about the gun availability laws in this country"

and both of those way more than the thing people SHOULD be saying

"we need to look at the state of mental health institutions in this country"

Well, I happen to have tons of liberal friends, so go figure. Hah.

Yeah, I was thinking similarly in regards to mental health institutions. Maybe there are better ways to certify people as "safe" gun holders. Even still though, there are numerous ways to bypass having to get a gun license since, for example, one can just make a gun. Hmm :/.

 

[cannedbread]

if only those little kids had guns this could have been avoided

janitors
guns
fund it

 

[Mindnight64]

What I want to say is, is that I don't think gun control laws will solve the problem at its core. HOWEVER, I will certainly concede that implementing gun control laws will definitely promote less opportunities for individuals to decide to randomly shoot civilians on the premise that they won't have a gun when the time comes to make that random decision.
...
The reason why I don't think gun control laws will necessarily fix the problem is because I've heard about underground markets that sell unregistered firearms. There are also undoubtedly a lot of unregistered firearms that are already in circulation anyway because making a gun isn't a mystery.

I agree completely. And, I do think that the problem is more within the human nature than in the fact that people are allowed to possess guns.

Lol, this isn't the kind of thing that you would expect to read about on a website dedicated to a video game, and I commend you for taking a step outside of the SSBB world and addressing a topic like this. Goodnight.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

Lol, this isn't the kind of thing that you would expect to read about on a website dedicated to a video game, and I commend you for taking a step outside of the SSBB world and addressing a topic like this. Goodnight.

Well it's the user blogs.

Also true that what luigi's saying. I'm pretty sure the primary reason this happened was not because "he had a gun" but "he was crazy."

 

[Strong Badam]

bringing up the gun control issue is a somewhat disrespectful scapegoat to the real problem here. this kind of messed up dude would have done terrible things whether he could get his hands on a gun or not.
i'm mostly neutral on the gun control issue; i don't plan to have a gun in my lifetime, but that may change.

 

[Big-Cat]

Like Strong Bad, I don't have any intention of having a gun. It just makes me uncomfortable, but I will admit, like with the case of the mother, that there is a time and place for them.

"we need to look at the state of mental health institutions in this country"

Perhaps it's not the mental health institutions we should be looking at. Rather, we should be looking at the mental health of the people in this country. After all, that's where it starts and the crazies that shoot up everyone don't, as far as I know, have a history of being in the nut house.

I personally think some of these issues deal with fear (which then raises more questions). I mean, how many people have gotten guns out of fear? Probably more than we realize. After all, look at how many groups use fear to control the public. We've got religious groups that threaten with fire and brimstone if you don't do as they say. We've also got politicians that will use certain events in their favor like the "wars" on terror, drugs, violence, etc.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Something similar happened in China yesterday http://news.ca.msn.com/world/china-stabbing-spree-hurts-22-schoolchildren

A knife-wielding man injured 22 children and one adult outside a primary school in central China as students were arriving for classes Friday, police said, the latest in a series of periodic rampage attacks at Chinese schools and kindergartens.

The attack in the Henan province village of Chengping happened shortly before 8 a.m., said a police officer from Guangshan county, where the village is located.

The attacker, 36-year-old villager Min Yingjun, is now in police custody, said the officer, who declined to give her name, as is customary among Chinese civil servants.

The major difference is that the attacker in China had a knife, and no one died. The Connecticut attacker had a gun, and 27 people were killed. Strong Bad may be right that this guy would have done something terrible anyway, but it's doubtful he would have been able to kill so many people in his attempt.

Perhaps stricter gun control laws wouldn't prevent a senseless tragedy like this, but at this point, I'm ready to try anyway. I also disagree with those who say that now is not the time to talk about this. If not now, then when? When the NRA and the various interest groups have time to regroup and launch a counterattack against attempts at gun control? The emotion of this event, and events like it, are really the only hope that gun control proponents have against lobbyists as powerful and well-organized as the NRA. We all should take the pain and sadness we feel and use it constructively, not wait until it passes and we're back at the status quo. We definitely need to address mental health in our country, but that shouldn't become an excuse for totally ignoring the fact that we have a gun problem as well.

Syndicated columnist Mark Shields said something on the PBS NewsHour that I think bears repeating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=003S8o6e-1A#t=2m17s

This is what guns do, and if we don't want these things happening, or any of the thousands of gun murders that occur in the US annually, then we need to get past our reluctance to control guns.

 

[Big-Cat]

Mark Shields of the New York Times said something on the PBS NewsHour that I think bears repeating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=003S8o6e-1A#t=2m17s

That was really well put. Once you start to realize the destructive potential behind anything, the right thing to realize is that these are deadly and should only be used as a last resort.

And this is probably completely inappropriate, but from the excerpt of that Chinese incident:

The attacker, 36-year-old villager Min Yingjun, is now in police custody, said the officer, who declined to give her name, as is customary among Chinese civil servants.

reminded me of the royal Canadian wedding from South Park which is even better as the article is from Canada.

 

[Jam Stunna]

My mistake, Mark Shields isn't from the New York Times.

 

[Teran]

Prohibition does nothing. "The War on Drugs" is proof of that.

It wouldn't in America's case, no, but absolute prohibition does work.

UK is an example of that, I mean we do have gun crime but just the issue of supply (and the sort of people that supply these things) lowers the level dramatically.

Of course it's replaced with knife crime, but I mean, you can run from a knife wielder if you're lucky, plus the fact that it's just not quite as easy (or clean) to attack with a knife as it is a gun. Not to mention you can defend yourself with a melee weapon if you can get hold of one.

Basically the point is USA gun control won't really work because even if all the guns were melted and **** there's ample supply from South American countries etc, plus the fact that you'd have to get all the criminals to hand in their guns.

Because we all know criminals use licenced firearms.

 

[Pachinkosam]

Seeling obama crying just broke my heart.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I'm not really saying we should mess with our gun laws, but I simply must say I don't see what people are getting at when they say that gun laws won't solve anything because criminals will just find something else to do something terrible with. The thing is though, gun laws indeed don't remove the criminal, but it sure as hell keeps a gun from them as opposed to a much less deadly weapon.

Again I'm not really saying that we should do anything with the gun laws, just don't like that particular bit of reasoning.

 

[GwJ]

I agree completely. And, I do think that the problem is more within the human nature than in the fact that people are allowed to possess guns.

Lol, this isn't the kind of thing that you would expect to read about on a website dedicated to a video game, and I commend you for taking a step outside of the SSBB world and addressing a topic like this. Goodnight.

You are obviously new here.

 

[BarDulL]

I agree completely. And, I do think that the problem is more within the human nature than in the fact that people are allowed to possess guns.

Lol, this isn't the kind of thing that you would expect to read about on a website dedicated to a video game, and I commend you for taking a step outside of the SSBB world and addressing a topic like this. Goodnight.

I'm not the only one who does this in User Blogs. AFAIK, the Debate Hall is also a productive area of the boards when it comes to ongoing stuff in society. Thanks for the recognition though!

Something similar happened in China yesterday http://news.ca.msn.com/world/china-stabbing-spree-hurts-22-schoolchildren



The major difference is that the attacker in China had a knife, and no one died. The Connecticut attacker had a gun, and 27 people were killed. Strong Bad may be right that this guy would have done something terrible anyway, but it's doubtful he would have been able to kill so many people in his attempt.

Perhaps stricter gun control laws wouldn't prevent a senseless tragedy like this, but at this point, I'm ready to try anyway. I also disagree with those who say that now is not the time to talk about this. If not now, then when? When the NRA and the various interest groups have time to regroup and launch a counterattack against attempts at gun control? The emotion of this event, and events like it, are really the only hope that gun control proponents have against lobbyists as powerful and well-organized as the NRA. We all should take the pain and sadness we feel and use it constructively, not wait until it passes and we're back at the status quo. We definitely need to address mental health in our country, but that shouldn't become an excuse for totally ignoring the fact that we have a gun problem as well.

Syndicated columnist Mark Shields said something on the PBS NewsHour that I think bears repeating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=003S8o6e-1A#t=2m17s

This is what guns do, and if we don't want these things happening, or any of the thousands of gun murders that occur in the US annually, then we need to get past our reluctance to control guns.

I took a look at your article and noticed that security guards are actually posted at every elementary school in China because of attack patterns in the last few years. Maybe security guards and more law enforcement is a step in the right direction?

Still though, the way I see it, 22 people getting stabbed, while a lot better than 27 people dead, is still a gross amount. If security guards hadn't been posted at those elementary schools, who knows what would have happened?

People also have the capability to make bombs and guns just by doing some research online. While I feel kinda lame saying this, there are definitely more efficient ways of killing people available to criminals than just trying to stab them, and those people who were stabbed got pretty lucky when the stabbing could have been otherwise fatal for sure.

I'm not really saying we should mess with our gun laws, but I simply must say I don't see what people are getting at when they say that gun laws won't solve anything because criminals will just find something else to do something terrible with. The thing is though, gun laws indeed don't remove the criminal, but it sure as hell keeps a gun from them as opposed to a much less deadly weapon.

Again I'm not really saying that we should do anything with the gun laws, just don't like that particular bit of reasoning.

I addressed this point earlier on, specifically this part of my post:

The reason why I don't think gun control laws will necessarily fix the problem is because I've heard about underground markets that sell unregistered firearms. There are also undoubtedly a lot of unregistered firearms that are already in circulation anyway because making a gun isn't a mystery. In fact, you can actually look up how to make a gun via your standard online search engine. The other thing is, is that guns aren't the only lethal weapons available, as typical household products can be used to make lethal poisons as well as bombs (Columbine comes to mind). Knives, swords, and other various objects can also be used as weapons to harm people. So that kinda leaves us with the question of "well, then how do we respond to this tragedy as a nation?"

Even if we did require people to be licensed to use a gun (and required them to meet strict criteria in order to use said guns), criminals would still find ways to purchase unregistered firearms or make guns themselves through online search engines. I have actually spent 5 minutes looking up how to make a gun for the sole purpose of proving a point, and I found a website that has an elaborate guide on how to make a .22 silenced pistol. It tells you the mechanics of the gun, how to build it, and what tools/materials are needed for it, and it's unfortunate for me to have to say that you can actually gather all the tools/materials you would ever need from your average tool/hardware store.

That being said, if we implement several gun control laws, it still wouldn't keep criminals from buying illegal fire arms or making them themselves. Requiring people to be licensed simply limits the number of people that can use fire arms legally, but criminals are criminals because they do things that are illegal.

 

[Biz_R_0]

I'm really not seeing a good solution either way. If we make gun laws stricter, we'd be taking away guns from well-meaning enthusiasts and people looking to defend themselves, which are almost everyone with a gun. If we don't, the wrong guy might get his hands on one legally.

 

[Teran]

I'm not really saying we should mess with our gun laws, but I simply must say I don't see what people are getting at when they say that gun laws won't solve anything because criminals will just find something else to do something terrible with. The thing is though, gun laws indeed don't remove the criminal, but it sure as hell keeps a gun from them as opposed to a much less deadly weapon.

Again I'm not really saying that we should do anything with the gun laws, just don't like that particular bit of reasoning.

Basically think of it this way, most of the time people who want to use guns for purposes other than self defence most likely won't be eligible for a licence.

In the case of school shootings though, it is most often just a case of someone who is totally insane, and sadly of course giving them a gun is going to cause a lot more damage. The thing is though, more important than taking guns away from people is dealing with the diseased minds in it, and preventing such minds from festering. I mean tbqh if people weren't such *******s, guns would probably only exist in the form of hunting rifles.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Does anyone know anything about this dude? Didn't he have like a girlfriend? Not saying he can't have a girlfriend or whatever, just wondering if he was like "seemingly" a normal dude that just snapped or something, if you know what I mean.

 

[Teran]

Didn't he have like a girlfriend?

If that's the case it probably explains it tbh.

 

[Firus]

I have zero desire to get into a debate about gun control, but I thought it was kind of relevant to note that the guns Lanza used were not his, but his mother's.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/n...first-victim-recall-her-as-generous.html?_r=0

 

[BarDulL]

If that's the case it probably explains it tbh.

I almost died when I read this.

I'm not sure if he had a girlfriend or not, probably not because it says in the article Firus linked that the kid dropped out of high school and was considered socially awkward and recluse albeit "smart." Mostly homeschooled and kept to himself, didn't have many friends. Hrm.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2012/12/14/school-shooting-leaves-multiple-injured/

^ That says he has one and a friend. Though apparently they are missing.

 

[Muhti]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=15151115#post15151115

We're debating about restrictions on guns here.

What's strange is that I made the topic two days before the shooting happened.

 

[Jon Farron]

Think about it this way: if the teacher had a gun, shooter would be dead, 20 kids alive.

For those who are for gun control laws:

If they take our guns away, we have no self defense. At all.


I do think that those purchasing guns should undergo a psychological background check or something. (to prevent the psychos from getting one)

But you know I'm honestly wondering if (conspriacy theory time!) people brainwashed the guy into going into a psycho rampage and killing people, just so they could insert gun control laws.

You never know. o3o

 

[Jim Morrison]

The problems causing these types of things are rooted far deeper in the psychological state of your country.

 

[Teran]

I think giving most people permission to vote is enough, giving them all guns is just not something you want happening.

The reason why the Swiss get away with lots of people having guns is that western Europeans have a certain trait commonly known as being civilised.

 

[GwJ]

Think about it this way: if the teacher had a gun, shooter would be dead, 20 kids alive.

Not necessarily. This guy barged in, the teachers most likely wouldn't have been ready. He probably would've shot a few people (and I'm guessing he shot the adults first for the sake of his plan), in which case it wouldn't have mattered.

For those who are for gun control laws:

If they take our guns away, we have no self defense. At all.

Not really. Gun control laws don't intend to take guns away from people. Gun control laws are meant to improve the standards by which someone must meet in order to have a gun.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Think about it this way: if the teacher had a gun, shooter would be dead, 20 kids alive.

Because we all know that under pressure people are 100% accurate with a gun and have lightning fast reflexes, right? Right?


What if she missed? What if she wasn't even able to draw? What if on some other day, a weird kid saw her gun, took it, and shot people? Wow it's like there's a thousand different situations I could come up with that are just as valid as your ridiculous claim!

White Mage what the **** is wrong with you? Are you on a mission to always be wrong and look as ignorant as possible? Is that it?

Or maybe it's because you're just not...DASHIIIING.

But seriously that was such a dumb thing to say. I probably won't respond to your next post due to your history of only getting worse with the ridiculous **** you're willing to say as a "debate" goes on, you know, the kind of debate you see between Sean Hannity and some liberal he's hoping to **** all over then cut off when he starts to make a point.

 

[Johnknight1]

If we ban guns, how do we defend ourselves? Also, to top things off, those who want guns can always either learn how to make them or buy them off the black markets if we were to ban guns.

Plus, there is Australia. Australia saw crimes go up 3.2% after they banned guns, and saw gun-related crimes go up 300% after guns were banned.

@ Stupid Idea Mage
If teachers had guns, I'd probably be dead. In my time in public school, 5 of teachers at the schools I went to were either convicted or fired for some sort of sexual harassment/sex offender-related issue, and 2 of the teachers at the school I went to were fired for abusive behavior.

If you want to go ahead and give those people guns, you should be responsible for that. Really, if anything, there should just be cops present in schools. At least they are trained to use guns, and know how to use them. Also, this is how I feel about your argument.

The problems causing these types of things are rooted far deeper in the psychological state of your country.

Because shootings never happen in other countries. Of course the big difference is America (compared to other countries) has a much higher population (310 million+), so these things naturally happen more in America. The same thing goes for China. All things considered, I think the America's violent crime rates have dropped in recent years.

Really, the issue is the availability of guns to those with mental issues, those who have guns not keeping them in a safe and inaccessible location (seriously, kids should not be allowed to wield guns), our inability to teach kids that guns are not toys (they are dangerous, and you will regret using them untrained or without someone with training around you), people feeling the need to bully and have power over other people (or as we call it, world history; ultimately, this creates unneeded rising violent urges on both sides), and people turning their back on people with clear mental issues.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Why does everyone automatically equate gun control with banning guns? It's either that, or people preceive gun control as some sort of intolerable assault on freedom. It makes discussing perfectly reasonable aspects of gun ownership impossible because defenders of gun rights jump to the most absurd conclusion possible and then argue from there.

No one is suggesting that we ban gun ownership or confiscate every gun. However, there are legitimate steps that can be taken (reinstating the assault weapns ban, gun buyback programs to get illegal guns off the street) without destroying the 2nd Amendment. But we can't even discuss those modest steps without the knee-jerk reaction being, "No, not my guns and freedom!"

 

[Big-Cat]

The problems causing these types of things are rooted far deeper in the psychological state of your country.

And I'm amazed that this isn't discussed enough.

Because shootings never happen in other countries. Of course the big difference is America (compared to other countries) has a much higher population (310 million+), so these things naturally happen more in America. The same thing goes for China. All things considered, I think the America's violent crime rates have dropped in recent years.

Really, the issue is the availability of guns to those with mental issues, those who have guns not keeping them in a safe and inaccessible location (seriously, kids should not be allowed to wield guns), our inability to teach kids that guns are not toys (they are dangerous, and you will regret using them untrained or without someone with training around you), people feeling the need to bully and have power over other people (or as we call it, world history; ultimately, this creates unneeded rising violent urges on both sides), and people turning their back on people with clear mental issues.

I wonder how countries with larger populations like China and India are in crime rates in comparison to the US. Even with that said, the United States is all over the place when it comes to crime rates. You have some cities that have very low rates while places like New Orleans are 10 times the national average. Therefore, it's quite possible that some places have had rates GO UP over the years.

When it comes to gun access, some guns simply should not be in the hands of civilians. One I commonly hear that shouldn't be allowed are automatics. Seriously, what kind of civilian is going to need to use those? People in general need to realize the deadly potential behind guns like the marines. Once you realize what you're wielding, the idea of using it becomes less appealing.

 

[Teran]

Civilians are really allowed automatics?

Wtf?

 

[Jam Stunna]

No, automatics are banned.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Whether we can defend ourselves without guns I'm not entirely sure, but everywhere I look online, I see statistics and things say that having guns at home increases injury and homicide rate considerably (go figure).

 

[Shadocat]

Give this a thought:

Banning guns wont stop a damn thing. You think im wrong, take a look at the drug war going on.

If you take away the guns, you may as well start learning to defend yourself in hand-to-hand combat, because thats pretty much all youre gonna have left.

 

[Pink Reaper]

Here's a thought:

The majority of crazy *** people who have shot up schools are not gang affiliated. They're mentally disturbed people who can still outright just buy guns and ammunition with little to no problems. They are not the kind of people capable of getting these guns on the low because they have no means to do so. Stronger gun regulations wouldnt stop the crazy *** gang violence that everyone seems to assume is going to erupt and murder every non-gun owning american in the country should a ban happen, but it would probably help cut down on crazy *** people shooting school children.