Gun ownership poll

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I keep asking the same question. As I recall after Sandy Hook there was a big push to step up security in schools. What happened?

There was no interest in any proposal besides even more restrictions on the 2nd.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

There was no interest in any proposal besides even more restrictions on the 2nd.

Move a few police officers from traffic details where you have two officers supervising one minor repair to guarding schools?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Move a few police officers from traffic details where you have two officers supervising one minor repair to guarding schools?

Oh I agree with you personally, but there has never been one of these incidents in which the gun banners were willing to consider any real legislation besides more regulation on a right generally utilized by their political enemies.

I don’t think it’s about trying to actually address the problem ina meaningful way for anti-2nd legislators, it’s about criminalizing their political opposition.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by G1911

I don’t think it’s about trying to actually address the problem ina meaningful way for anti-2nd legislators, it’s about criminalizing their political opposition.

Here is a list of some laws passed in Connecticut after 20 children and 6 adults were murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012:

https://patch.com/connecticut/across...-hook-shooting

For some of these, it seems quite a stretch to describe them as "for the purpose of criminalizing the political opposition".

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Here is a list of some laws passed in Connecticut after 20 children and 6 adults were murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012:

https://patch.com/connecticut/across...-hook-shooting

For some of these, it seems quite a stretch to describe them as "for the purpose of criminalizing the political opposition".

Adam Lanza used his mother's gun, no?

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Adam Lanza used his mother's gun, no?

Yes, he did.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Yes, he did.

So all the legislation in the world wouldn't have prevented it. Minimal security at the school might have, though.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Here is a list of some laws passed in Connecticut after 20 children and 6 adults were murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012:

https://patch.com/connecticut/across...-hook-shooting

For some of these, it seems quite a stretch to describe them as "for the purpose of criminalizing the political opposition".

“Assault weapon” and “high capacity magazine” bans as this article leads off with are exactly what I’m talking about. These accomplish absolutely nothing, there is no evidence that they do. There is considerable evidence that they don’t. These are commonly owned normal firearms and parts and have been for over half a century. Banning standard capacity magazines does not save a single person. All it does is punish the other side.

Both sides like to trample on rights mostly used by the other side. Many of their voters will have a genuine sentiment, whether it’s the left thinking the State can somehow regulate guns to the point that a paradise comes into being or the right thinking that the murder of a fetus is a great moral wrong. Banning standard magazines, passing a bounty law to reward people who report their neighbors for abortions, politicians are well aware this does not actually address a real problem, it’s just to fire shots at their political opposition. I think it is a shame when they choose to do this instead of apply any reason to the problem.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by G1911

“Assault weapon” and “high capacity magazine” bans as this article leads off with are exactly what I’m talking about. These accomplish absolutely nothing, there is no evidence that they do. There is considerable evidence that they don’t. These are commonly owned normal firearms and parts and have been for over half a century. Banning standard capacity magazines does not save a single person. All it does is punish the other side.

Both sides like to trample on rights mostly used by the other side. Many of their voters will have a genuine sentiment, whether it’s the left thinking the State can somehow regulate guns to the point that a paradise comes into being or the right thinking that the murder of a fetus is a great moral wrong. Banning standard magazines, passing a bounty law to reward people who report their neighbors for abortions, politicians are well aware this does not actually address a real problem, it’s just to fire shots at their political opposition. I think it is a shame when they choose to do this instead of apply any reason to the problem.

Fair points and I understand where you're coming from. I recall reading that there was actually a drop in gun-related deaths in the years after these laws were passed, but there are obviously many factors to consider in evaluating that.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Move a few police officers from traffic details where you have two officers supervising one minor repair to guarding schools?

When I graduated, my high school was the largest (campus size, not population) in the state of Texas. It may still be, I don't know. We probably had 30 or more buildings, but I don't know exactly. I can tell you that included 4 cafeterias, 3 gymnasiums and 2 libraries. Each building probably had 4 entrances, so you're looking at 120+ entrances. It would be impossible to put a guard at every entrance or even 1 per building. Your idea would probably work at most schools, wouldn't have worked at mine.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

A teacher purposely propped open that particular door and then wedged it with something to keep it open, that door is automatically locked from the outside at all times. I imagine that is very common at schools so the teachers can take a quick smoke or get on their phones for a little bit.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I keep asking the same question. As I recall after Sandy Hook there was a big push to step up security in schools. What happened?

Originally Posted by G1911

Oh I agree with you personally, but there has never been one of these incidents in which the gun banners were willing to consider any real legislation besides more regulation on a right generally utilized by their political enemies.

I don’t think it’s about trying to actually address the problem ina meaningful way for anti-2nd legislators, it’s about criminalizing their political opposition.

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

When I graduated, my high school was the largest (campus size, not population) in the state of Texas. It may still be, I don't know. We probably had 30 or more buildings, but I don't know exactly. I can tell you that included 4 cafeterias, 3 gymnasiums and 2 libraries. Each building probably had 4 entrances, so you're looking at 120+ entrances. It would be impossible to put a guard at every entrance or even 1 per building. Your idea would probably work at most schools, wouldn't have worked at mine.

There is a negative relationship between education and police. People of color, who don't trust police, and who are allied with Democrat politicians, don't really want police in schools (I'm a moderate Democrat - a dying breed! I'm also a teacher). The official term is "school to prison pipeline." This looks at POC receiving much harder punishments for the same activities in school compared to white kids who are let off with a slap. This often comes down to white parents yell louder and appeal school discipline. POC who receive OSS numerous times eventually drop out, and this leads to higher crime rates.

You want a good read, check out the ongoing problem in Spokane WA. Spokane Public Schools vs Spokane PD & City Council. City Council asked FBI to get involved. SPS has a non written policy "do not contact the police." The front page headlines in Spokane could be many a district in this state. Teachers of both political parties don't feel safe, but this is a top down initiative starting in the state capitol. One veteran teacher said, "We let the inmates run the asylum."

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Steve D]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

When I graduated, my high school was the largest (campus size, not population) in the state of Texas. It may still be, I don't know. We probably had 30 or more buildings, but I don't know exactly. I can tell you that included 4 cafeterias, 3 gymnasiums and 2 libraries. Each building probably had 4 entrances, so you're looking at 120+ entrances. It would be impossible to put a guard at every entrance or even 1 per building. Your idea would probably work at most schools, wouldn't have worked at mine.

Easy.....put a fence around it. The high school I went to had around 25 or so buildings, about 1,600 students. They put up a tall solid fence around the school, with locking gates. You can do that at any school. Any time a gate is open, you have a security guard standing there.

Steve

[jingram058]

Well, a lot of talk after yet another round of events. But in the end, same old same old. Nothing will change. These things will continue to happen because those who could make changes happen do not want that.

[irv]

Originally Posted by G1911

Pretty accurate, the exacts change year to year of course, but the vast majority of ‘gun deaths’ are suicides every year. After you take out those, you take out people shot and killed by the police (who of course are not regulated by gun restrictions), and rightful self defense shootings (most self defense uses of a firearm don’t result in a corpse or even a shooting, most of the time the gun doesn’t need to be discharged to neutralize the threat) you’re left with a very small number. And of that small number, almost all of them are handguns. The most commonly used cartridge in a murder is .22lr, the weakest commonly available round and the least reliable. On the macro level, it is incredibly rare for someone to be killed with a ‘scary rifle’ like an AR or an AK. Last I checked a few years ago, the FBI statistics reveal a person is more likely to be murdered with a hammer than with a rifle with a pistol grip and detachable magazine.

Personally, the framing of the debate reveals the political nature. If the purpose was humanitarian, we would look at murders, not ‘gun deaths’. The weapon used does not make a murder more or less tragic, but we act like it does because nobody politically cares about hammers or kitchen knives. That doesn’t score points for their side.

I agree 100%. It's unfortunate that many don't see the virtue signaling, the politicization and the media spin that is put on these types of tragedies. Taking legal guns away from legal, rightful owners, like our PM is attempting to do, will not stop anything, but yet many still don't understand this, unfortunately.
https://www.tiktok.com/@garyramey1/v...kmXy8FTat&_r=1

https://youtu.be/vZSA7QjVT6A

Trudeau's new gun law doesn't target gun crime
https://torontosun.com/opinion/colum...rget-gun-crime

[BobC]

I understand a lot of the positions and points people are making, but in the end, all a lot of you are proposing is really nothing more than putting a band-aid on an ever-increasing problem in our country. All that adding more controls and monitoring, background checks, security, and such, does is tantamount to treating the symptoms, and not actually working to even try to cure the underlying disease and its causes. The problem is, there is no really specific, direct cause that can be focused on to correct things.

Part of the problem may be in how we raise our children these days. Spanking or disciplining children back in the early baby boomer days was how children had been raised forever it would seem prior to, and up through, my generation. When I was a kid, if you got swatted at school, you prayed no one called and told your parents because if the school did, chances are you'd get an even worse whupping from your parents when you got home. Children were more often taught to respect and listen to adults and older people, not talk back, nor cause issues and obey the rules. Nowadays, kids are more often taught to stand up for themselves, question things and authority, and speak out and against others who are telling them what they should be doing. That kind of modern thinking, coupled with the information and images that our children are now bombarded with on a daily basis due to the internet, unfiltered images and information and lack of responsible censorship on TV, movies, and other media available to them, helps to put ideas and images into their heads. A lot of the TV shows and movies, especially those accessible on streaming and internet services, oftentimes show and glorify extremely violent and lethal images and ideas. The human brain is not fully developed and a person's persona and such not truly mature until someone reaches their mid to late 20's. All these changes and images and such affect and influence our thinking and actions growing up and developing into the people we become.

As such, mental health is probably another huge factor as well in at least some of these incidents. And let's face it, our country's handling of people with mental issues and disabilities isn't stellar. More often than not, we try to sweep such people under the rug, and end up leaving it to our law enforcement to take over in such situations. I've heard that possibly 30%-40% of those people in our prisons today actually suffer from some form or type of mental illness or mental deficiency. Our society would probably be better served as a whole by not just locking them up and throwing them into our penal system. But that is what our society does, out of sight, out of mind, right? Even drug use can be hugely affected by mental issues. Many, many, many young people in their teens and early 20's get involved in, and continue drug use, as a form of self-medication for underlying mental issues. Locking them up in our "war on drugs", is that really how we should best be handling and helping such people?

Another factor is population. Regardless of what we say and do, there is always going to be some portion of our society that is going to have mental issues and deficiencies, and some small portion that is going to be psychopathic, whether we like it or not. And the larger our population grows, the more of such people, including psychopaths, there are. And there is really nothing we can do about that.

Also, many may point to the extinction of the nuclear family as a further contributing cause to the issues we face. Instead of Moms (or Dads) being at home to raise their children, give them guidance and instruction, and steer them to be respectful and helpful of others, more often than not in today's world, children are raised in single parent families, or in those where both parents need to work to make ends meet, leaving their children to be raised by others who are not so concerned with how they are brought up, and their values and thinking being more influenced by the TV and internet they are often left with to entertain them. Just think, were it not for kids being left to entertain themselves so much with the internet and such, "Baby Shark" is likely not the most played online song of all time.

And of course, the internet and social media has created the influences and ideas that previously weren't available to our population. You wouldn't have people running off to join ISIS, or other such organizations, or hearing and absorbing such extreme ideologies, if they weren't readily available to our population.

None of these, and the myriad of other potential contributing factors to people's mental health and thinking and other issues that can lead to these situations we are experiencing with regard to guns, is the sole, major contributing factor. But they are contributing to these situations and issues and more of the true causes as to why these episodes are happening more and more. Along with the 24/7 media we now have, putting such things out there and contributing to other people then seeing and copying and emulating those in these other situations. Unfortunately, there is no easy solution or answer to what is happening in our society, and foregoing our constitutional rights and protections aren't necessarily going to solve and stop any of these situations and episodes either. I wish I knew of a quick fix to our society's problems in regard to guns, but there is no one single solution that will ever make everyone is our society happy. Bottom line is, increased gun control and security alone will not stop such episodes from still occurring, and there's no guarantee that instituting any such measures would ever have completely stopped any that have occurred. Again, those are ways to treat the symptoms, not the cause.

And since someone else also brought up the issue of abortion and the upcoming SCOTUS ruling, I thought I'd mention there is a somewhat hypocritical correlation between those states that have a death penalty, and those that are proposing more stringent and restrictive abortion rights. It is interesting, and something I don't quite understand, how people who are pro-life, could also be pro-death penalty. I imagine many of those who do follow this thinking, rationalize such by declaring the major difference is that one side of the issues deals with innocents, and the other side with guilty parties. It just seems to me that if you are a pro-life proponent, you would be pro-life in ALL regards and instances, and not just pick and choose when and where to follow your instincts. Just saying.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by Steve D

Easy.....put a fence around it. The high school I went to had around 25 or so buildings, about 1,600 students. They put up a tall solid fence around the school, with locking gates. You can do that at any school. Any time a gate is open, you have a security guard standing there.

Steve

Again, who is going to pay for all that?
And honestly, what kind of America do you envision? Tall fences and armed security guards around every neighborhood school? Maybe some razor wire? What would college campuses look like?

[Peter_Spaeth]

"Second, I would move the legal age to purchase a firearm up to 21. There are no guarantees that any steps will work, but NOT DOING ANYTHING DOES NOT WORK."

That damn Second Amendment won't let you do that though.

Gun laws barring sales to people under 21 are unconstitutional, appeals court rules