What "meaningful action" would suggest to prevent more mass shooting in the US?

[Celeste]

.......
But where is the line between a semi-automatic, and an assult weapon?  Is there even a line?
Better yet, what the fuck is an assult weapon anyway?

I have been asking that question since the beginning and no one has bothered to try to answer, not ever looked up the pertinent BATF documents.  Well perhaps they have done that and seen how impossible it is to define.   

[pdxmike]

If gun owners were held responsible for crimes their guns were used for after being stolen, their solution might be to buy bigger guns to keep the first ones from being stolen.  Plus I don't like the idea of punishing the victim.  But there are all kinds of laws that recognize that owning things that can be hazardous to others entails responsibilities that laws address--i.e. swimming pool owners need to put up fences, dog owners need to control their dogs, etc.  Guns certainly fit in that group of potentially dangerous things for which some regulations make sense for keeping them from being stolen. 

I generally don't like regulations, and see some quagmires coming in the details, but they're inevitable. 

[pdxmike]

Here in San Diego last week there was a current military wearing a bullet proof vest shooting his assault weapon at a downtown condo complex and ended up shooting and being shot by a policeman. Is he the guy you want guarding our schools?

No, he is not.  

But why did you ask that?  Is it that nobody can consider an armed school guard option because there's the possibility that a nut will be hired?  Fortunately, nobody thought that way when the decision was made to allow the policeman who shot him from being armed.

I'm not lobbying for armed guards at schools, I just don't see any logic behind that question.

[JeanG]

"Illinois is the only state in the nation that doesn't have some form of concealed carry law, and Chicago itself effectively outlaws any kind of gun possession. Yet at midyear, gun violence was mostly to blame for this startling statistic: More Chicago residents had been killed in the city than the number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan - 144 soldiers compared to 228 victims in the Windy City."

"The past summer was one of the deadliest on record in Chicago. Weekend shooting totals drew national attention and put the city on the defensive as it sought to explain the skyrocketing rate as an increase in gang-on-gang violence."

"The main problem with gun-control laws is that they don't work. Florida State University criminology professor Gary Kleck, a political liberal and one-time supporter of gun-control laws, has been studying guns and their effect on violence and crime since 1976. What he's found is that gun-control laws have no net effect on violence or crime rates, because the benefits of widespread gun ownership cancel out the costs.
...
And there are benefits of widespread gun ownership. For one, guns deter criminals. Burglars are less likely to target occupied homes or businesses in countries with high rates of gun ownership than they are in countries with low rates of gun ownership, probably because they don't want to get shot. Guns also level the playing field between victims and their attackers, who tend to be young men. According to Kleck, "There are perhaps 600,000-1 million defensive uses of guns each year, about the same as the number of crimes committed with guns." And contrary to popular belief, gun-wielding victims of assault or robbery are less likely than unarmed victims of assault or robbery to be injured."

[crtraveler]

The problem with legally putting guns into schools by means of armed teachers or guards etc... is that we're assuming that they will be responsible and act as they should.... - what happens when the guard or teacher goes crazy and can now legally enter the school with a gun AND has the trust of everyone there already...or when the teachers or guards kids wanna do the same thing that this idiot did with his mom's guns....?  Obviously, there is no simple solution (or solution - period...)...this is a classic case of the unsolvable issues that accompany a morally bankrupt society, not just here in the US, but around the world.

[JeanG]

The problem with legally putting guns into schools by means of armed teachers or guards etc... is that we're assuming that they will be responsible and act as they should.... - what happens when the guard or teacher goes crazy and can now legally enter the school with a gun AND has the trust of everyone there already...or when the teachers or guards kids wanna do the same thing that this idiot did with his mom's guns....?  Obviously, there is no simple solution (or solution - period...)...this is a classic case of the unsolvable issues that accompany a morally bankrupt society, not just here in the US, but around the world.

Any teacher can put a pistol in his pocket and walk in with his firearm right now, today, anywhere in the world into his school.

Any individual can don a false Police uniform and do the same - this is precisely what happened in Norway.

[pdxmike]

The problem with legally putting guns into schools by means of armed teachers or guards etc... is that we're assuming that they will be responsible and act as they should.... - what happens when the guard or teacher goes crazy and can now legally enter the school with a gun AND has the trust of everyone there already...or when the teachers or guards kids wanna do the same thing that this idiot did with his mom's guns....?  Obviously, there is no simple solution (or solution - period...)...this is a classic case of the unsolvable issues that accompany a morally bankrupt society, not just here in the US, but around the world.

That's exactly why I don't go to airports or courthouses, and why I hide anytime I see a policeman or anyone in a uniform.  Also why I won't take an airplane, or even a bus, or get shaved at a barber.   I won't even mention surgery.  Leaving my fate in the hands of anyone who could potentially go nuts is just too risky. 

Again, there are arguments against armed school guards, but that's not a very convincing one.

[PDLSFR]

Here's another thought about some maeaningful action....How about the News starting to cover more stories about armed citizens stopping a robbery, car jacking, rape, etc....it happens every day -  but the news media has a black-out directive to not make these acts public...I'd like to know why? I'll tell ya why..It simply encourages citizens with training and CC permits to to take action if and when needed. Yes there is potential for additional accidents to occur but I would bet my quiver of boards that that you'd see a decrease in some violent crimes being commited.

[crtraveler]

The problem with legally putting guns into schools by means of armed teachers or guards etc... is that we're assuming that they will be responsible and act as they should.... - what happens when the guard or teacher goes crazy and can now legally enter the school with a gun AND has the trust of everyone there already...or when the teachers or guards kids wanna do the same thing that this idiot did with his mom's guns....?  Obviously, there is no simple solution (or solution - period...)...this is a classic case of the unsolvable issues that accompany a morally bankrupt society, not just here in the US, but around the world.

That's exactly why I don't go to airports or courthouses, and why I hide anytime I see a policeman or anyone in a uniform.  Also why I won't take an airplane, or even a bus, or get shaved at a barber.   I won't even mention surgery.  Leaving my fate in the hands of anyone who could potentially go nuts is just too risky. 

Again, there are arguments against armed school guards, but that's not a very convincing one.

Hey PDX - it wasn't necessarily meant to be an argument against armed guards, more like an argument reinforcing the fact that even what some in this thread are viewing as a "solution" can, at times, create even more of a problem.

On a separate note, whatever happened to metal detectors in schools? Are they still being used?

[Weasels wake]

Here's another thought about some maeaningful action....How about the News starting to cover more stories about armed citizens stopping a robbery, car jacking, rape, etc....it happens every day -  but the news media has a black-out directive to not make these acts public...I'd like to know why? I'll tell ya why..It simply encourages citizens with training and CC permits to to take action if and when needed. Yes there is potential for additional accidents to occur but I would bet my quiver of boards that that you'd see a decrease in some violent crimes being commited.

Pissshaaa, that goes against the main stream media's template (and I'm sure you know where their loyalties lie).

[stoneaxe]

Here's another thought about some maeaningful action....How about the News starting to cover more stories about armed citizens stopping a robbery, car jacking, rape, etc....it happens every day -  but the news media has a black-out directive to not make these acts public...I'd like to know why? I'll tell ya why..It simply encourages citizens with training and CC permits to to take action if and when needed. Yes there is potential for additional accidents to occur but I would bet my quiver of boards that that you'd see a decrease in some violent crimes being commited.

The LAST thing government wants is citizens that can act on their own. Last year here in MA a guy saw someone breaking into his car in his driveway. He went out and confronted him (unarmed) and in the ensuing fight he broke the guys jaw (one punch) and then pinned him to the ground until the cops came. He was arrested for his actions and the attorney general had every intention of prosecuting him until the outcry became too much. The crook had a long record of drug and burglary arrests.
We are all supposed to sit around like sheep until the cops get there. Based on my experiences by the time the cops get there it's usually just to pick up the pieces.

To those of you that are posing questions you hope don't really have an answer...answer me this. How many kids do you think would be dead if a plain clothes cop was in the school? If it saves just one kid isn't it worth it?

[stoneaxe]

Hey PDX - it wasn't necessarily meant to be an argument against armed guards, more like an argument reinforcing the fact that even what some in this thread are viewing as a "solution" can, at times, create even more of a problem.

You don't think that infringing on the 2nd amendment can have unintended consequences?

[pdxmike]

Here's another thought about some maeaningful action....How about the News starting to cover more stories about armed citizens stopping a robbery, car jacking, rape, etc....it happens every day -  but the news media has a black-out directive to not make these acts public...I'd like to know why? I'll tell ya why..It simply encourages citizens with training and CC permits to to take action if and when needed. Yes there is potential for additional accidents to occur but I would bet my quiver of boards that that you'd see a decrease in some violent crimes being commited.

I've always dismissed the claims about lack of coverage of those cases as right-wing whacko paranoia.  But in the case of last week's Clackamas Town Center shooting near Portland, a young man did have a legal concealed weapon, and actually did pull it out and aim at the shooter.  He didn't shoot because there was a bystander behind the shooter that he didn't want to hit.  He was aiming at the shooter as the shooter's gun jammed. 

Furthermore, the shooter saw him aiming at him.  The shooter apparently got his gun working again, but didn't shoot anyone else after that.  Instead, he fled and shot himself. 

There was an article about this in the local news (I posted it earlier:  http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html  ).   Granted this shooting was displaced by the even worse school shooting, but still I thought I'd be seeing it prominently in the national news--but barely any mention.

Clackamas and Connecticut both had similarly armed gunmen.  Both killed themselves when responders came.  In Connecticut, it was the police.  In Clackamas, it was this civilian.  Connecticut had over 20 deaths.  Clackamas had two, and none after the civilian aimed his gun--even though the mall had apparently 10,000 people in it. 

Since there was apparently some time between the civilian aiming and the police response, and the shooter did get his gun unjammed, or at least had another gun because he shot himself, it's completely plausible that this civilian stopped the shooter from killing many more people.  You can argue about the merits of concealed weapons, but I do find it surprising that this got almost no mention in national news.

[SUPflorida]

A friend sent this to me. thought you all would find it interesting

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'.  IT'S A NO BRAINER!DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!It's time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us.You're not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to disarm the people~

[Kevin]

A friend sent this to me. thought you all would find it interesting

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'.  IT'S A NO BRAINER!DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!It's time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us.You're not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to disarm the people~

Fun group of guys and gals.