OT: This will end well. (Last of this series of OT's)

[Robatoy]

[Jim]

I share your concerns.

[George]

tool at the office. Zero tolerance. Of course, a lot of those tools in the cabinet look more deadly to me.

[Charlie Self]

Gun problems around here used to occur only during hunting season, and tended to involve wasted time at schools for staff and students who would stand in the parking lot and compare rifles to use for killing deer later in the week, said rifles resting in a rack in the rear window of either the teacher's vehicle or the student's vehicle. In the past 15-20 years, though, it seems (and this is impression only, so could easily be way the hell off) people are choosing more often to shoot each other, rather than deer.

The answer? I don't have one, but I am sure it's not what the idiot woman who wrote the Roanoke paper recommended: force all gun manufacturers out of business immediately. She was sure the "gun problem" would then go away. Unfortunately for that attitude, all that would happen is a bunch of people would be thrown out of work. There are probably 300 million guns in the U.S. and possibly many more. Those won't go away with a ban on manufacturers. Nor will the fact that anyone with any kind of half-assed metal lathe can rather quickly grab some bar stock and run up a gun. The gun may not be a carbon fiber Glock, but it will fire, just as the car antenna zip guns fired in the streets of New York in '50s.

[sweet sawdust]

defense. It seems like the place you need it most these days is at schools.

Is it just me or does it seem that everytime the media gets on the subject of school shootings another one happens?

[DS]

Where else can a psychopath be virtually guaranteed that they can carry out their sick fantasies with little chance of being interfered with by someone capable of defending themselves?

[Robatoy]

After Ted Nugent started advocating the idea that people should simply pop a few bullets through their car doors at possible carjackers, and a few actually did.... the car jacking slowed down.

It would a different 'feel' when you know your targets, and all their mates, can shoot back.

[DGDevin]

There are something like 20,000 firearms-related laws on the books in the U.S., one has to wonder if they were all enforced vigorously what impact that would have on violent crime, and wouldn't that make more sense than passing more laws that will be cheerfully ignored by criminals and psychos? I read an article some time ago about a district attorney who had the police target firearms possession by convicted felons and prosecuted them seriously instead of making it a slap on the wrist, it had a clear effect on violent crime in the area as criminals went back to jail and those on the loose got nervous about being caught with guns and decided to live without them. Seems like a simple enough idea, doesn't it.

I also have to wonder what the point is of having background checks if they are are done as ineffectively as in these last couple of high-profile school shootings. How does someone who has been ordered by a court to undergo psychiatric treatment or who has spent a year in a psychiatric institution pass a background check? Wouldn't it make more sense to close those loopholes than to call for bizarre "solutions" like closing down firearms companies or punishing law-abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong? "Solutions" like that make as much sense as fighting traffic fatalities by putting the auto makers out of business and punishing drivers who haven't had accidents, yet plenty of folks seem to lose all common sense when the subject of guns comes up.

[Tom Bunetta]

folks that wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights felt that the second amendment allowed the People to carry out the duty and directive to overthrow a government that became oppressive...

Granted my 30-06, .45's, .9mm's, .22's and shotguns probably wouldn't stand up to a mini-gun or a .50 machine gun... but the principle is reassuring and a dis-armed population wouldn't stand a chance were that needed.

Check the increase of crime rates in England or Australia since they allowed their politicians to take away their guns! And while you are looking research the crime rates in areas with carry permits vs. those without them (DC.)

Personally I'd like to see a law requiring all citizens to (1.) be trained in firearm use and care and (2.) be required to carry at all times in public... Seems to me some nutcase (and all we read'\/see/hear about ARE nut cases) would be more reluctant to pull a weapon of ANY kind if he/she/it knew everyone around them could take 'em out.

I have a carry permit, and have for years... been shooting since childhood (family weekend entertainment), including a Navy rifle and pistol team, have a 13 year old daughter that's becoming a pretty good shot, and have NEVER shot a human being (there ARE a few I wouldn't mind seeing coming up missing though.)

Sticks don't choose to hit someone (OWWC: except kick-back), knives don't jump up and stick people and guns don't kill people... PEOPLE DO THOSE ACTS of VIOLENCE. Doing something to control people seems like an obvious choice... but of course politicians seldom choose the easy way to do things.

Now I have no interest in a fully automatic weapon, can't afford the ammo! But I'd support a responsible citizen's right to own one.

Tom

[Tom Bunetta]

[J. Clarke]

Ask most cops what they consider to be the ideal ending to a "home invasion" call and most of them will tell you "get there and find the perpetrator spread eagled on the lawn being held at gunpoint by the resident". Means no innocents were hurt, they get him, they don't have to chase him, they don't have to fight him, they don't have to investigate the resident (which they would have to if the perp was dead), and it's going to be difficult for the perpetrator to get out of the charge.

[Tom Bunetta]

Amen and Amen, Brother! Tom