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

[JT]

No matter your feelings on firearms--whether for, against or somewhere in the middle--no one wants to see more mass shootings like the ones perpetrated with disturbing frequency in the US.

So what realistic "meaningful action" could the President and others take?

I say "realistic" because I don't think it possible to simply assume away all the weapons already here. I'm interested in responses from both (all?) sides of this polarizing issue.

I sometimes think the national debate here would be more productive if all those in favor of very strict gun laws would first own (and carry them), while those who already own (and carry them) would get experience living in a country where private ownership of firearms is forbidden, but personal security is not significantly compromised. This doesn't address the whole constitutional angle, but it might help everyone see everyone else's point of view.

Meanwhile, thoughts and prayers for the victims of violence.

[JeanG]

The President was obviously referring to gun control.

Unfortunately, history and empirical evidence show that such "meaningful action" will have little or no impact when it comes to saving innocent lives.

The public likes to think that reality can be changed with the stroke of a pen, that some new piece of legislation will make bad things stop happening, but the reality of such situations is quite often the exact opposite.

[1tuberider]

Less violent viewing on tv without trouncing on the first amendment is a start.

[Admin]

Hold people personally accountable for violence done with their guns, stolen or otherwise.  The right is to bear arms.  It is a responsibility as well.  

No assault weapons.  

[1tuberider]

Hold people personally accountable for violence done with their guns, stolen or otherwise.  The right is to bear arms.  It is a responsibility as well.  

No assault weapons.  

Its a duty. In Ca you need a safe to store a gun in.  You report on purchase.  I agree with most but aw violence accounts for so little of the gun related violence that its really not effective. Cheap handguns are mainly used in gun violence. 

Yes accountability with meaningful consequences.  Texas uses their death chamber.
I still think we need to start with the social problems to really get long term results.

[PDLSFR]

Society has also accepted violent video games which we all know might be rated for teens or adults but kids of all ages are playing them. The days of kids playing in their backyards or at the local park or playground are a thing of teh past not only becasue of the video games but because of the fear parents have of wacko's such as this guy or the child molesters, and I hate to admit it, rightfully so. Meaningful Action I can promise you will not result in tougher gun control but possibly tougher penalties for gun related crimes. As an active gun carrying, law abiding, neither Rep or Dem voting US Citizen , I can safely say that the NRA and deep pocket organizations and politicians will not allow more gun control and with this very sad shooting will just bring all the parties views full circle as it does after ever mass shooting. I am totally amused by all the people on here as well as on TV and Radio screaming and yelling about more gun control, how about more active crime prevention and locking up all the bad guys and keeping them behind bars....Hey not sure anyone noticed but since they made Mental Health a sickness same as drug abuse and alcohol abuse, there are no longer the Mental Institutions around with some of the violent and repeat offenders locked away, nope they'd rather dope them up, call it therapy/treatment and leave them out in society to cause more of these mass murders to happen. It just always seems to me that these major shootings or serial killers all seem to be significantly mentally ill yet they are all walking around planning and plotting....hey just my 2 cents.

[Admin]

Oregon, Connecticut, Colorado.  All in the last few months.  All assault weapons.  

[Fark]

A new establishment of values.  I know it sounds old fashioned, but I seems like lots of people care less and less these days.  Look at most of the kids these days compared to even when I was growing up, and it seems obvious why things are on the decline.

[Tom]

There should be a mandatory mental and emotional stability test to all those who try to buy an assault weapon. The test is very simple, if you feel you need to have an assault weapon, you are too crazy to own one.

[Old School 213]

Prozac in the water.

We can't uninvent guns, they are here and we're going to have to accept that. Even if we could uninvent guns tomorrow incidents like this would still take place with edged weapons, home made bombs, cars or even airplanes. Making guns any more difficult to obtain won't have any impact other than growing government bureaucracy and inconveniencing a lot of people that will and should be allowed to get them anyway.

At the core of this is the behavior of an individual. So how do we influence the behavior of individuals? To tell them it's not OK to massacre innocent individuals, commit suicide by cop or even harm themselves with a firearm? Is it a question of societal norms, our acceptance of violence? Care for the mentally ill? Economic well-being?

[lucabrasi]

This is all off the top of my head with my limited experience or knowledge. Far more experienced members here and please correct me if I am wrong. Assault weapons are short rifles with larger magazines to hold larger clips which will hold more bullets. They are the same bullets (for the most part) as ones found in other firearms. The ones I know about are generally smaller caliber bullets (.223) with big charges behind them to make the bullet fly straight and far with a high velocity. They will fire a round as often as you pull the trigger without having to pull a bolt back or break open the action to reload. The explosion of the gunpowder does that for you. A round is chambered and waiting for the next trigger pull. That is what makes a semi automatic. Hit your target in a non lethal spot and you have a round ready without having to take your eyes off of it and maybe chase it in the woods for hours or days and possibly leave a wounded animal to suffer. Also lets you get that extra shot off on that pheasant or duck as it is flying away. I have noticed when I use a single action shotgun I seem to be a better shot. I know I only have that one chance because by the time I can reload it is far out of range. Funny how that works. I miss far more with a pump or semi. Revolvers (double action) are the same kind of thing in that the cylinder spins and the next round is waiting for the next trigger pull. It is limited by its size and will generally only hold 6 rounds. Those 6 rounds will fire off as fast as 6 in a semi auto for the most part (close) but then you must reload. Reloading a revolver takes longer than a semi auto. A single action revolver must have the hammer cocked again before another round is ready. Still pretty quick but still limited by the size of the cylinder and how many rounds it will hold.
Semi auto weapons have a place. An argument against assault weapons can be made but for the most part it is really just a different "look" than a hunting rifle. Yes, larger magazines are more normal for the assault weapons as are shorter barrells. Does it make for a different mindset of someone who has one? Perhaps. Designed to kill humans as were handguns I would imagine but in the end not that different of a gun.

I do not know what ""realistic" options there are out there. Responsibility is needed and wanted for sure but that is a whole different can of worms. The desensitized world in which we are in now is just breeding selfish wackos and thugs at a higher percentage than in the past I think. We coddle, we accept, we tolerate, we rehabilitate instead of demanding responsibility and acceptable behaivor. What a confusing mess our world is.
Smaller societies seem to breed less undesirable behaivor???

[AM9K]

I live in California where we have some of the "toughest" gun control laws in the USA.  Somehow; they haven't kept me from collecting a small arsenal.  I am a true gun enthusiast. I compete in precision match competitions.  I know many, many gun owners.  Besides Stand-up, guns are my other hobby.  I've been doing the match thing for many years.

I am convinced we do need new (smart) gun laws. Today- as a member of the gun community,  I'm thinking hard about how we could possibly prevent tragedy like what happened yesterday. 

[PonoBill]

There is no such action. No instant cure. We could certainly undertake a direction, but it would have to be a lot more meaningful and concerted than banning assault weapons. I have nothing against such a ban, I can't think of a valid reason for someone to have such a weapon, but such a ban would have no effect on incidents like this.

The gunman also had two pistols. I have nothing against banning handguns. If I thought they would ALL go away I'd gladly give mine up. But they won't.

Banning violent videogames? Doesn't seem likely. Nearly all really popular videogames have a deep thread of violence. I don't play them, I think they're a stupid waste of time. Ban away, but I wouldn't expect much.

Media portrays people like this as deeper and darker than they are. What all these cowards have done is murder defenseless people--the more defenseless the better. It would be nice to see media paint these people as they are--no ultimate evil but simple cowards hoping to be elevated beyond their meaningless pathetic existence by a cowardly act of horror.

Ultimately though, once an act like this enters a culture, it's hard to shake it loose. Suicide bombers in the mideast. Kneecappers in Ireland. A meaningful direction to affect a change would be careful, considered, and long term.

In the meantime, mourn for those poor babies and their parents, teachers, relatives and friends.

[JeanG]

Smaller societies seem to breed less undesirable behaivor???

Even small societies aren't free from violence, and huge societies aren't guaranteed to be violent. It's quite bizarre.

Huge countries such as Brazil, the US, and Russia have a lot of violence... but are no more violent than their smaller neighbors. Guatemala, Puerto Rico, and Panama are historically more violent than their larger neighbor in Mexico to their north (current narco war in Mexico notwithstanding...).

Tiny Lebanon has seen more violence in recent decades than either of it's huge neighbors in Turkey and Egypt.

Finland has double the homicide rate of Sweden... why?

Minneapolis has a fraction of the homicide rate of Detroit... why?

Austin has a fraction of the homicide rate of New Orleans... why?

Japan is a large homogenous island country - and is one of the least homicidal nations in the world. The nearby Philippines is a large homogenous island country - and is one of the more homicidal... why?

China is the largest country in the world, and homicide is extremely rare.

There is not pattern that I can find anywhere. Whether guns are legal, illegal, tightly regulated or totally unregulated seems completely irrelevant to homicide rates.

Another interesting fact is that the worst school massacre in US history was not committed with a gun let alone an assault rifle... it occurred before assault rifles had been invented.

[PonoBill]

Yeah, the Bath school massacre is a real head scratcher. In retrospect it's obvious the guy was unbalanced and yet he was elected to responsible positions several times. He planned the bombing for almost a year. Cold-blooded premeditation at a time when things weren't actually going bad for him. His financial issues arose at about the time of the massacre, but they didn't have anything to do with all the explosives he had already planted at the school. If he'd been fully successful it probably would have killed many more kids. If you read the particulars without the date you could assume it was recent history, but it was 1917.