Gun ownership poll

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by Leon

It's a debate and he started with his premise. Others have rebutted, agreed and disagreed.
Personally, I think this thread has been quite tame. IF it goes off the rail it will get locked. Hopefully it stays ok.
Also, if anyone is seriously debating you need to have your name out here per the rules (or per me asking for them in this thread, whatever you want)

As for this debate, I don't think guns kill people. I have never heard of a gun just killing someone with no one pulling the trigger (yes, there are probably extraordinary situations).
I will go back to the biggest problem in America today, and what leads to most (not all) of this, BAD PARENTING.

.

I'm not saying the thread should be locked. It's hardly a debate, though, when the OP states "There is no question this country has a gun problem," and anyone else who partakes in the so-called debate is handcuffed by a "no politics rule" fear.

I simply believe it's in poor taste to have this discussion/debate in the wake of an event that took the lives of a bunch of 4th graders. Between the shooter's mental health history, the obvious piss poor parenting from the POS's POS mother, and the police response, blaming the inanimate firearm(s) shouldn't even come to mind.

All shootings involve mental health issues, while most additionally involve family issues and some sort of Big Pharma drug. Nobody wants to debate that, though, because it 1) doesn't make someone money, 2) the topics don't exactly fit certain political agendas, and 3) actually solving problems means less money to be made and less opportunity at power grabs, encompassing 1 & 2.

Never let a good crisis go to waste, right? So, please, "debate" away while my wife and I discuss schooling options that are not public school, considering "debates" like this prove fewer people actually care about focusing on real solutions to protecting our kids than should.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Kyle, to one of your points, last year in my hometown the police shot and killed a man who refused to put down his weapon and was behaving in a very threatening way. The officers were exonerated, but what struck me was the finding that the man was on an unbelievable cocktail of about 10 psychoactive meds. My thought was that his doctor was the one who should have been investigated.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

I'm not saying the thread should be locked. It's hardly a debate, though, when the OP states "There is no question this country has a gun problem," and anyone else who partakes in the so-called debate is handcuffed by a "no politics rule" fear.

I simply believe it's in poor taste to have this discussion/debate in the wake of an event that took the lives of a bunch of 4th graders. Between the shooter's mental health history, the obvious piss poor parenting from the POS's POS mother, and the police response, blaming the inanimate firearm(s) shouldn't even come to mind.

All shootings involve mental health issues, while most additionally involve family issues and some sort of Big Pharma drug. Nobody wants to debate that, though, because it 1) doesn't make someone money, 2) the topics don't exactly fit certain political agendas, and 3) actually solving problems means less money to be made and less opportunity at power grabs, encompassing 1 & 2.

Never let a good crisis go to waste, right? So, please, "debate" away while my wife and I discuss schooling options that are not public school, considering "debates" like this prove fewer people actually care about focusing on real solutions to protecting our kids than should.

I feel it's ok to have this discussion in the wake of a huge tragedy. It might be more disrespectful in a different venue (such as in Uvalde proper) as it might be seen as too soon. There have been tens of millions of discussions just like this one since this last tragedy.

I politely disagree with "all shootings involve mental issues" . Maybe most mass shootings do but not ALL shootings in general. That said I am only guessing.

I think this debate does, as you and your wife are doing, spur debate concerning school safety, home schooling and much more. That is a good thing.
.

[vintagetoppsguy]

How many remember the Cokeville Elementary School Bombing? It happened in Cokeville, WY on May 16, 1986. A crazed loon and his wife took 154 hostages (mostly children) in a classroom and threatened to designate a bomb if his demands weren't met (I think he wanted $2 million per child, but I don't remember exactly). Anyway, the idiot's wife accidentally designated the bomb and fortunately only her and her husband were killed. However, a lot more were seriously injured. My point is this: you don’t need guns to kill a lot of people. These two idiots tried to do it with a bomb. Sure, you can argue that they were unsuccessful and only killed themselves in the end, but the point is that the bomb was powerful enough that it could have killed everyone in that classroom. Just remember 9/11 - a few bad guys with boxcutters killed nearly 3000 people and there were no guns involved. We didn’t have discussions about banning boxcutters or making them less accessible. No, we locked and reinforced cockpit doors. Why don’t we lock schools (where were can) and individual classrooms?

[BCauley]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Just remember 9/11 - a few bad guys with boxcutters killed nearly 3000 people and there were no guns involved. We didn’t have discussions about banning boxcutters or making them less accessible. No, we locked and reinforced cockpit doors. Why don’t we lock schools (where were can) and individual classrooms?

This seems to be a common saying/meme going around in the past few days due to a certain person who typically doesn't know what she's talking about.

The response to 9/11 wasn't just reinforcing cockpit doors and, yes, boxcutters and other sharp objects were made to be less accessible. Even today, only some sharp items are allowed in carry on bags or on your person while others need to be stowed away in checked baggage. The response to aviation threats has only added more security measures.

https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-...objects?page=0

Along with that, the government actually responded to the issue pretty quickly instead of today's world where there is initial outrage, followed by talks of "compromise" to work together and come to a solution, and then followed by everybody moving on to the next shiny object to cause outrage and forgetting about the previous issue until it happens again.

Within three months of 9/11, DHS and TSA were created. Screening was handed over to the government instead of private companies. The Patriot Act was passed. Someone tried to detonate his shoe a few months later so now we all have to take our shoes off for screening. All baggage is now screened for explosives and other prohibited items. There was then a threat involving liquids so all liquids, gels, and aerosols were banned from carry on bags (later updated to no more than 3.4 ounces in a clear plastic bag). There is also now 100% pre-screening for all domestic, outbound, and inbound flights to the US.