PCS Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 http://washingtonexaminer.com/after-school-shooting-in-connecticut-piers-morgan-blasts-americas-gun-madness/article/2515972#.UMt1WbteiRg CNN’s Piers Morgan again called for more gun control after news broke this afternoon about another shooting – this time at a school in Connecticut.According to state officials over a dozen people were killed at an elementary school in Newtown Connecticut, including children. “Another day, another horrific shooting,” Morgan wrote on Twitter. “America’s gun culture has to change.” “When will America deal with its gun madness?” Morgan asked, referring to the multiple shootings occurring within the United States this year. *Click Link For More* Okay. Have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I just want to point out that it appears that these recent mass shootings have mostly been perpetrated by individuals who acquired their weapons legally. I could be wrong (and I will edit this if I am), but I believe the Virginia Tech, Arizona, and Colorado shootings were all carried out by people who should have been flagged in a database somewhere. That's pretty damning to the current system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Im all for a ban. Complete and all-out ban. Enough is enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuposse87 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 The right to bear arms isn't the issue, its the regulation and issuing of said arms that seems rather idiotic to me. Unless you live in a war zone...why does one need a bullet proof vest, or multiple fire arms for that matter? Would limiting it to one gun per person solve anything? I don't know I'm just thinking out loud and trying to make sense of the senseless :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Personally, I think that there's a chance that if the people who perpetrated these shootings weren't able to pretty much walk into a place and get a gun, that they may not have murdered all of those people, but nobody really knows that. With just an outright ban of guns, that won't stop the possibility of something like this. It's not a bad place to start though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
County1883 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Americans may argue about whether their country is dominated by a pro-gun culture. But this much is certain, attested to by the Newtown school shooting: It is far too easy in America for a sick mind to find a gun and use it. Enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armstrong001 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 The right to bear arms isn't the issue, its the regulation and issuing of said arms that seems rather idiotic to me. Unless you live in a war zone...why does one need a bullet proof vest, or multiple fire arms for that matter? Would limiting it to one gun per person solve anything? I don't know I'm just thinking out loud and trying to make sense of the senseless :/ Why do people have more than one of anything? Because they do different things. I own multiple firearms, and they are all good for different purposes. Of course, none of them have ever been used to kill a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 We are so behind as a society. From twitter: German Police fired less bullets in 2011 than the shooter likely fired today http://t.co/QuhPgA0x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAZology Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Create a government agency whose job it is to strictly monitor all guns. Any gun manufactured needs to have GPS and other technology allowing the gun to be monitored by this agency at all times. If the gun moves from your basement to your bedroom, they know. If you are a hunter or sportsman, you log into this government agencies website prior to exiting your home, you notify them where you are going to hunt, the guns you are bringing, the route you are taking. If you skew from that route, they notify the authorities to detain you. If each gun had some type of technology associated to it and could be tracked, it may assist in avoiding these circumstances. The second this kid left his house with the guns, the agency would know the guns are on the move, loaded, etc... and they could get someone to stop this guy. This may not be the answer, but I am trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Personally, I think that there's a chance that if the people who perpetrated these shootings weren't able to pretty much walk into a place and get a gun, that they may not have murdered all of those people, but nobody really knows that. With just an outright ban of guns, that won't stop the possibility of something like this.It's not a bad place to start though. No one knows...you're right. But it's logical to say it would have made it much tougher on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armstrong001 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Personally, I think that there's a chance that if the people who perpetrated these shootings weren't able to pretty much walk into a place and get a gun, that they may not have murdered all of those people, but nobody really knows that. With just an outright ban of guns, that won't stop the possibility of something like this.It's not a bad place to start though. So you're ok with confiscating property of tens of millions of people because of what a handfull of people have done? And that's just a good place to start? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuposse87 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Why do people have more than one of anything? Because they do different things. I own multiple firearms, and they are all good for different purposes. Of course, none of them have ever been used to kill a person. Is your multiple possession of firearms because of some practical purpose or recreational? I understand if it has some practical purpose (like hunting or something)...but if people own multiple guns just for the sake of owning multiple guns...I'm not so sure that's necessary in society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan07 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Im all for a ban. Complete and all-out ban.Enough is enough. right there with ya brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stugein Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Disarming innocents does not protect innocents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armstrong001 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Is your multiple possession of firearms because of some practical purpose or recreational? I understand if it has some practical purpose (like hunting or something)...but if people own multiple guns just for the sake of owning multiple guns...I'm not so sure that's necessary in society. Both. I enjoy putting holes in paper. I also like to hunt. I also like to be able to defend myself and family. I also like to collect ones that are historically significant. If a person doesn't use them illegally, what does it really matter what purpose a person owns them for? There are a lot of things that aren't "necessary" in society, but we don't try to ban unnecessary things because they might be used by a handful of people to hurt others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 right there with ya brother. I'm trying not to overreact, but the facts are beginning to tell a story that 2012 American society can't handle the right to own guns. It's obviously a small group ruining it for the millions of law-abiding gun owners, but that happens and can't be ignored just because it's not the majority of people. I'll put it this way, I'm more concerned with the 0.01% of gun owners who could potential flip out and do something like this than the rights of the 99.99% of gun owners who are doing everything by the book. It's not fair, but I'm just sick of seeing innocent people die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I can understand that people want to own their guns and its their right, etc. etc. but ... when you look at the level of gun vioilence in the U.S. compared to other developed/1st World countries, how can you not think that a radical change is needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Disarming innocents does not protect innocents. This guy in CT was innocent before he shot up a elementary school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armstrong001 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 This guy in CT was innocent before he shot up a elementary school. And due to it being a school zone, the innocents inside were disarmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 And due to it being a school zone, the innocents inside were disarmed. So now the answer is sending little Billy to school with a gun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endzone_dave Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I can understand that people want to own their guns and its their right, etc. etc. but ... when you look at the level of gun vioilence in the U.S. compared to other developed/1st World countries, how can you not think that a radical change is needed. It's scary how much higher our murder rate is compared to countries like Germany, UK, Japan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chew Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I'm a 30 year old tree-hugging liberal, but I'll be damned if the gov't tried to take my guns. Unless local law enforcement will assign a sheriff's deputy to provide me with 24-hour security, i'm going to continue carrying a loaded pistol everywhere I go. Guns will never be banned, and they shouldnnt be. Just make the process of buying a firearm much more involved, with more emphasis on mental health. Not just criminal record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Disarming innocents does not protect innocents. Although banning guns would make it considerably easier to determine who isn't so innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Im all for a ban. Complete and all-out ban.Enough is enough. I agree. Are guns that important? No, they aren't. They cause too much damage. Get rid of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armstrong001 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 So now the answer is sending little Billy to school with a gun? Yes, because there are no people in a school besides children. They teach and run the school themselves. CT schools are way ahead of the curve when it comes to cost cutting measures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.