Connecticut School Shooting

[Abby Normal]

Its only a matter of time before guns are made illegal in the US. Whether its in 10,25or 50 years is the question. I guess its just a matter of how many tragedies occur how soon to make it finally happen.

[Errata]

Clearly the pro gun side needs better representation. The Spokesman for the NRA gets called out several times for lying, people are trying to secede from the Union (which is clearly just a product of rabid insanity and total stupidity), and people are trying to get a guy deported for coming down in favor of gun control. And the guy who starts the petition unspools SPECTACULARLY on his targets show. It's not like there isn't a valid point to made, but it should probably be made by people who are neither liars nor batshit crazy. Just an opinion.

[sdreid]

Anyone who calls an AR-15 an assault rifle is either a liar or ignorant. I know it's like trying to teach algebra to your dog but an AR-15 is a carbine not an assault rifle! An assault rifle is a type of a machine gun and an AR-15 is not a machine gun - Got it! Probably not.

Calling an AR-15 an assault rifle is the same as calling a Beretta 9 mm pistol a submachine gun.

Assault rifle is the rough translation of Sturmgewehr which is the name Hitler gave to a type of ultra-light machine gun that fell between a light machine gun and a submachine gun.

The term "high-powered" assault rifle is also an ignorant idiom because an assault rifle is by definition a medium powered weapon. If it was high-powered then it would be a light (or higher) machine gun not an assault rifle. A BAR is an example of a light machine gun.

[Errata]

It's funny, but I can make a reasonable argument that the second amendment was actually nullified in 1791 shortly after it's ratification. That we in fact don't qualify for the rights enumerated in the second amendment, and the Supreme Court's various interpretations of our gun rights are all based on a flawed premise.

Now just because I can make that argument doesn't mean that's the argument that should be made. Reminding me that an AR-15 is not in fact an assault rifle also isn't the argument that should be made. You can make it, by all means, but it's not an argument that inspires confidence in guns, or the people who wield them. In fact, it's not entirely dissimilar from some gamer guy shrieking at me when I refer to a troll as an orc. Sure I got the parlance wrong, but is that really where you want to alienate me? Is that really the important thing I should take away from this? I mean, nitpick away if you want, but energies would be better directed towards trying to explain why some guy needs an AR-15 in the first place. What possible use does it have, and is that use worth the potential damage. And at some point I'd like someone to try and convince me that an AR 15 is something other than a two foot penis extension for those who can't afford a Porsche of some other outward sign of manhood, but I imagine I'll be waiting a long time for that.

[sdreid]

Well, an AR-15 is actually potentially less damaging than some semi-automatic hunting rifles like Remington 750 so where's the outrage about those? The 750 actually is a semi-automatic high-powered rifle. A person needs a AR-15 for the same reason they need a .357 magnum over a .32 - because it's a better defensive weapon. BTW, AR is short for ArmaLite not automatic rifle or assault rifle.

[RivkahChaya]

In fact, it's not entirely dissimilar from some gamer guy shrieking at me when I refer to a troll as an orc. Sure I got the parlance wrong, but is that really where you want to alienate me? Is that really the important thing I should take away from this? ... And at some point I'd like someone to try and convince me that an AR 15 is something other than a two foot penis extension for those who can't afford a Porsche of some other outward sign of manhood, but I imagine I'll be waiting a long time for that.

Excellent.

Also, I don't think firearms will ever be outlawed in the US. It's possible that handguns may be, or concealed weapons, by non-police/FBI/military/etc., or that certain types of clearly-designed-for-offense-not-defense weapons may be, because they already are in many jurisdictions, and it could become like the 21-year-old drinking age-- places with younger-than-21 got really tired of people coming in (driving, usually) from other places to get hammered, and become their problem, so everyone eventually raised the age. At some point, the few place where you can still buy a handgun, or a machine gun, or whatever, or places you can buy without a waiting period, may get tired of every other jurisdictions' nuts, addicts, and parolees coming in looking to buy.

[Errata]

I don't think guns will be outlawed, and I'm not sure they should be. Clearly we need to seriously thin the herd as to who gets to own a gun. I don't care if there are 30 guns for every person in America. As long as only about half of the Americans who currently have guns get to keep those guns. Because about half of the Americans who have guns clearly have no business having guns.

And anyone who is actually outraged about a single type of gun or category of guns has missed the point by so many miles, I'm not even sure they can get back in time to join the conversation. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.

Odd sidebar, I have a sociologist friend who did a survey of gun owners. He asked them who they would be willing to shoot in what circumstances. Then he proposed that guns would be outlawed, but flamethrowers would be available. He asked them the same questions. The number reduced by 80%. Which makes me laugh.

[Ally]

Clearly the pro gun side needs better representation. The Spokesman for the NRA gets called out several times for lying, people are trying to secede from the Union (which is clearly just a product of rabid insanity and total stupidity), and people are trying to get a guy deported for coming down in favor of gun control. And the guy who starts the petition unspools SPECTACULARLY on his targets show. It's not like there isn't a valid point to made, but it should probably be made by people who are neither liars nor batshit crazy. Just an opinion.

You know this whole thing pissed me off beyond belief. Anyone who has ever listened to two seconds of Alex Jones knows he's batshit crazy and absolutely unhinged. The mere fact that Piers invited HIM onto his show as some kind of "let's have a rational debate about gun control" was such a pathetically obvious see-through tactic. It would basically be the equivalent of inviting the Westboro Baptist Church on as a representative of the Christian voice for religion. Of course he unhinged spectacularly. He's a nut and everyone knows he's a nut.

There are actually intelligent people able to argue for gun rights coherently. Shockingly you don't ever see them getting invited on to have the discussion. It's always the nuts who of course froth and rant and then people go see... see... gun rights advocates are unhinged lunatics.

Talk about stacking the deck.

[drstrange169]

A guy who is "batshit crazy and absolutely unhinged", who "everyone knows is a nut" but still can legally own assorted assault rifles, would seem to prove Piers point.

[Ally]

Well THAT if you ask me is the real problem with our country. Our complete inability to do anything about the mental cases roaming around because we've passed law that states their individual rights must be respected, even when they are clearly nuts.

We've completely dismantled the mental health system in this country and are now pretty powerless to do anything.

If someone wanted to Baker Act Jones based off of his performance, I wouldn't have a problem with it, but he'd turn around and sue you for kidnapping and probably win because of course, the mentally nutty still have rights.

They of course don't actually have the right to own guns, but since we can't actually force anyone who is mentally ill into therapy or diagnosis, it's kind of a catch 22.

So yes, someone that unhinged shouldn't own guns, and if the law was actually followed, he wouldn't. But since we can't force the treatment of the mental anymore, (now we give them reality tv shows instead) it's an impossible law to enforce.

[Abby Normal]

Excellent.

Also, I don't think firearms will ever be outlawed in the US. It's possible that handguns may be, or concealed weapons, by non-police/FBI/military/etc., or that certain types of clearly-designed-for-offense-not-defense weapons may be, because they already are in many jurisdictions, and it could become like the 21-year-old drinking age-- places with younger-than-21 got really tired of people coming in (driving, usually) from other places to get hammered, and become their problem, so everyone eventually raised the age. At some point, the few place where you can still buy a handgun, or a machine gun, or whatever, or places you can buy without a waiting period, may get tired of every other jurisdictions' nuts, addicts, and parolees coming in looking to buy.

Hi
No they will be-except for law enforcement/military. Its not an if-its a when.
And sometime in the future, people will look back on our era and think how stupid, primitive and barbarian we were.

Hopefully I will live to see that day.

[Ally]

Ah, naive, condescending ignorance. Adorable. It's especially adorable when you consider this country expanded because we had superior weapons to the natives and used them to slaughter them indiscriminately. It's adorable when you think the first act of a dictator is actually to disarm its populace and some people in the world actually have an awareness of history and not some blind idealistic gaze on an unreachable future.

And Alex Jones being crazy notwithstanding, the fact is that Hitler did pass laws preventing Jews from owning, manufacturing or dealing in guns. And then he slaughtered them.

And Stalin also initiated gun control from the beginning of his rule.

It is to any government's advantage to have an unarmed populace and some people in this country are aware enough of the outside world and history to recognize that. Therefore, no, guns will never be outlawed. Our entire country was founded on the idea of not being made subject to a government. And the first step in that is not to allow the government to disarm us. It's one of the founding concepts of the country and the majority of us will never be so blithering naive as to think one day the human race is just going to magically evolve into higher beings. Given the option of improving their minds through reading or watching the Kardashians, well the kartrashians regularly pull in millions of viewers and I am pretty sure the vast majority don't even know how to read any more...

Well let's just say your hope for the future of humanity has such a rock-solid foundation. Indeed.

[Abby Normal]

Ah, naive, condescending ignorance. Adorable. It's especially adorable when you consider this country expanded because we had superior weapons to the natives and used them to slaughter them indiscriminately. It's adorable when you think the first act of a dictator is actually to disarm its populace and some people in the world actually have an awareness of history and not some blind idealistic gaze on an unreachable future.

And Alex Jones being crazy notwithstanding, the fact is that Hitler did pass laws preventing Jews from owning, manufacturing or dealing in guns. And then he slaughtered them.

And Stalin also initiated gun control from the beginning of his rule.

It is to any government's advantage to have an unarmed populace and some people in this country are aware enough of the outside world and history to recognize that. Therefore, no, guns will never be outlawed. Our entire country was founded on the idea of not being made subject to a government. And the first step in that is not to allow the government to disarm us. It's one of the founding concepts of the country and the majority of us will never be so blithering naive as to think one day the human race is just going to magically evolve into higher beings. Given the option of improving their minds through reading or watching the Kardashians, well the kartrashians regularly pull in millions of viewers and I am pretty sure the vast majority don't even know how to read any more...

Well let's just say your hope for the future of humanity has such a rock-solid foundation. Indeed.

Hi Ally
I have a degree in History and am fascinated by it and still study it so i am well aware of the importance of guns in shaping US history (and the world).
Knowing history well I am also a practical optimist that people/the world are getting better and we are evolving in a positive direction. We are better off than we were a thousand years ago, a hundred years ago, 50 years ago.

IMHO the bad of guns has come to far outweigh the good and its time for them to go.

[RivkahChaya]

Was my analogy not clear? most places that conceded to the 21-year drinking age were not really happy about it, they were just tired of the fact that because so many places around them had restricted drinking, they now had o deal with everyone else's drunks.

My implication wasn't so much that everyone will finally "see the light," but that after enough reactive legislation after school shootings, or whatever, there will be enough places with very restrictive legislation, that the last places without it will be forced to follow.

We have a lot of gun control legislation not, that would work, if we enforced it. Some isn't enforceable, and we should get rid of it, because unenforceable laws turn people into cynics and scofflaws. But we need to put more teeth into what is left.

The Catch-22 with mental illness and gun ownership? make anyone who wants to own a gun get a mental health screening. Any MD, NP-psych/GP/neuro, Ph.D psych in clinical practice, or MSW in clinical practice can be empowered to do it. Don't talk to me about cost, because someone who can afford a gun can afford a doctor. This isn't the same as forcing people to get treatment, because no follow-up is necessary (unless the person makes a direct threat that requires the screener to notify the authorities), and no one not seeking to own a gun would have to submit to it. I am not a psychiatrist, so I am not going to suggest how the screening should be done, or how long it should take, or whether it should require a multiple-choice test in addition to an interview, so that there is an objective portion.

Certain people might be exempt, like people whose jobs include a psychological screening.

There also needs to be a clearer law about loaning a gun to someone. We need to make a gun owner responsible for what is done with their guns, even if they don't do it themselves. There are already laws like this, but generally they are supposed to help people who report theft as soon as it happens, and then find their gun used in a crime months later. They are not supposed to allow people to retroactively report a crime after they lend a gun to someone, or fail to take any measure whatsoever to secure it, and the person they lent it to, or a family member, who knew what desk drawer it was in, uses it in a crime.

I could go on, but I won't. You get the idea. I don't want to outlaw guns. I just want people to be responsible with them.

[Hunter]

I am biting my tongue right now... but will refrain from further comments on this thread...
At least for the moment.