Martin Hash.com

Isn't a school shooting just a great illustration of what happens when you try to solve a problem with gun control and someone chooses to ignore the rules?

A nation of scofflaws, since 17 January 1920.

StCapps wrote:

GrumpyCatFace wrote:

StCapps wrote:This is what cognitive dissonance looks like.

No, I applaud it. It's a beautiful manipulation of statistics, for propaganda. Couldn't have done it better myself.

Yet another shining example, back to back. Go for the triple, don't stop now.

Nothing to see here, folks.

Okeefenokee wrote:

Montegriffo wrote:Who wants to cut funds aimed at protecting students?

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... grams.html

If you'd read past the headline, you'd have known better than to post that garbage in here.

The budget reportedly cuts $24 million from national school-safety programs and would eliminate “project prevent grants,” which are used to “serve students exposed to pervasive violence,” according to the Education Department. In the past, these grants have funded services such as conflict resolution and “other school-based violence prevention strategies.”

The budget also cuts funding from a program called School Emergency Response to Violence, or Project SERV, which was used to fund recovery efforts surrounding the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

That's basically the same thing as an armed guard, right?

Honestly I can't imagine living in a society which has to post armed guards on every school gate to ensure the safety of children but if you would rather live like that instead of exploring ALL avenues to prevent further massacres then that is what you must do.

Montegriffo wrote: Honestly I can't imagine living in a society which has to post armed guards on every school gate to ensure the safety of children but if you would rather live like that instead of exploring ALL avenues to prevent further massacres then that is what you must do.

What avenues do you present to prevent further "massacres?"

Haumana wrote:

Montegriffo wrote: Honestly I can't imagine living in a society which has to post armed guards on every school gate to ensure the safety of children but if you would rather live like that instead of exploring ALL avenues to prevent further massacres then that is what you must do.

What avenues do you present to prevent further "massacres?"

I misspoke, there is nothing you can do to prevent further massacres. There are many ways to reduce them though.

Montegriffo wrote: I misspoke, there is nothing you can do to prevent further massacres. There are many ways to reduce them though.

*all ears to hear about these many ways.

Tougher background checks to include any history of mental illness and signs of intent to use a gun for illegal purpose. This would include threats to shoot up a school.
Registration of all guns so that LEOs can monitor those building an arsenal such as the Vegas shooter and check to see if those making public threats against schools have the means to carry out an attack.
A ban on private gun sales without background checks to include gun shows where anyone can buy a gun with no cooling off period and no check.
Heavy restrictions on ownership of rapid fire large magazine crowd killing guns.

I shall now await the cries of muh rights and muh freedoms which usually accompany any attempt to reduce the amount of deaths in gun related incidents.

Montegriffo wrote:Tougher background checks to include any history of mental illness and signs of intent to use a gun for illegal purpose. This would include threats to shoot up a school.
Registration of all guns so that LEOs can monitor those building an arsenal such as the Vegas shooter and check to see if those making public threats against schools have the means to carry out an attack.
A ban on private gun sales without background checks to include gun shows where anyone can buy a gun with no cooling off period and no check.
Heavy restrictions on ownership of rapid fire large magazine crowd killing guns.

I shall now await the cries of muh rights and muh freedoms which usually accompany any attempt to reduce the amount of deaths in gun related incidents.

ANY history of mental illness?

Do you see how intrusive that is? Not to mention how it would totally work against its intent?

Say someone is a bit of a gun nut. Then he starts developing some mental issues. Do you really think he's going to try to get treatment early on, if he knows ANY history of mental illness will remove his rights to own firearms? Especially in a culture where firearms are in such high regard? What's more dangerous, an armed person with a mental illness getting treatment? Or an armed person with a mental illness not getting treatment? Because you're not going to catch on to mental illness early on, unless the mentally ill person try to get help.

Registration works, but again, the Americans would never accept it. As they do NOT trust their government in the same degree as most other western nations. It's also the global history of how gun registration always leads to confiscation of certain firearms from law abiding citizens. The implementation of gun registration in the rest of the world only works as a good argument against implementing the same methods in the US.

Ban on private gun sales without background checks would necessitate registration, which most wouldn't accept.

Heavy restriction of ownership of semi automatic weapons, like what? Banning them? Banning pistols is impossible in a gun culture like that is delusional. And semi automatic rifles, even though they're used in those attention grabbing mass shootings, are on the lower end of overall gun deaths in the US, as they're impractical for gang members, and if you're going to kill yourself, a cheap gun works just as well.


You could save more people in Britain by implementing stricter alcohol regulations, than you could save in the US by implementing stricter gun regulations. But the culture wants it, and therefore they're willing to take the societal costs of it.

Europeans telling americans what gun regulations they should impose sounds a lot like some Saudi Arabian telling the Brits how they should start closing down their pubs, and start issuing "drinking permits". Good intentions, it would save thousands of lives, but a total disregard of the other culture and values.

Cultures change. Recent polls suggest a two to one majority in favour of banning ''assault rifles'' and a similar majority in favour of tighter gun controls.

I will stop suggesting ways to cut gun deaths in the US when Americans stop telling me how to control immigration and stop terrorist attacks in my country.

Checks should be made to include mental illnesses but should be decided on an individual basis whether or not the illness should restrict the ability to own guns.

The right to damage your own health though mis-use of alcohol is not equivalent to the right to own firearms and risk the health of others.