Should We Reconsider Our Gun Policy?

[debo]

After a tragedy there is always an argument about our 2nd amendment rights and firearms.

Our forefathers were so compassionate about this right they put it right behind "freedom of speech, religion, etc. which is the main reason they left other countries. It is also in front of several other extremely important issues (protection from unreasonable search and seizure, due process, double jeopardy, self incrimination, trial by jury, speedy trial, right to counsel, assisted rights, protection from cruel and unusual punishment, excessive bail and many more...again, all came after - not to say they are less important but it highlights the importance of the issue.

Removing/restricting the rights of law abiding citizens is not the answer.
If that were the case every time a drunk driver killed a person (which happens far more often than guns) we should claim it's the cars fault...not the drunk.

What we need to do is make punishments on criminals firmer and make prison less desirable (accommodating).



More importantly, the recent tragedy is a horrible situation and my prayers are with those affected.

No, we shouldn't claim it's the car. We should claim it's a mentally unstable individual operating something that they shouldn't be allowed to operate.

You take away the "something" and the situation doesn't exist. No cars for intoxicated people, no guns for those who don't fall under the decided upon policy.

[Greedy22]

I voted for abiding by the Constitution more and for heavier screening. Everybody deserves the right to own a gun as long as they're not criminally insane or otherwise incapable of responsibly owning a gun.

I'd agree with this.

[{Ron!n}]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=bFIYLimyRHU

[Greedy22]

No, we shouldn't claim it's the car. We should claim it's a mentally unstable individual operating something that they shouldn't be allowed to operate.

You take away the "something" and the situation doesn't exist. No cars for intoxicated people, no guns for those who don't fall under the decided upon policy.

Exactly.

[MagicHero3]

No, crazy people that plan to do things like this aren't going to be deterred by a strict gun law policy, they will find a way to obtain a gun. Strict gun law policy only hampers law abiding citizens that would attempt to stop an event like this from happening from obtaining guns. That is my opinion on the matter.

this is such a redundant stance. MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO GET GUNS! its like "oh, car accidents happen, and ppl die. deal with it" instead of "car accidents happen, lets take measures to lower the chances of them happening or injuries from them". how would strict gun laws hamper law abiding citizens? if their law abiding, theres no reason for them not to have a gun unless they are mentally unstable. its like saying "lets not increase the punishment for drinking and driving" or "lets not take measures to prevent drinking and driving"

[{Ron!n}]

Like it says in the video

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Regulation comes before the right to bear arms.

[AmsterNat]

Re-posted from the other topic.

Dear God. I guess it's not surprising that there are gun loving, Second Amendment quoting retards here too.

The Second Amendment was a perfectly reasonable idea in the 18th century, when most people lived on a frontier, shot their food and, when the occasion arose, shot native Americans too. The likelihood of armed conflict was ever present, an armed militia composed of armed citizens made good sense.

We now live in an entirely different world. The idea that any country's constitution should 'guarantee' citizens the 'right' to keep and bear the kind of weapons of potential mass destruction that are currently readily available to everyone in the US, whether insane or not, is totally monstrous to anyone in the civilized world - except to crazy US right wingers who can do nothing but constantly scream, 'Second Amendment', and threaten to kill anyone who would try to take their guns.

Newsflash - the Constitution is a noble 18th century document. It is NOT etched in stone. Revising parts of this document to bring it a little closer to the realities of our modern world, would not mean the end of life as the gun nuts know it. The paranoid hysteria spread by the extreme right about the potential consequences of any attempt to regulate the availability and ownership of some of these appalling weapons, is too sickening for words. And their standard line - it's not guns, it's the people.

I have today seen gun loonies boldly aver that this tragedy would not have happened if the teachers had been armed.

I have today seen gun loonies proudly announce that their 7 year olds have learned to shoot.

There is no possibility of rational dialogue with people like this. Sadly, there are now enough of these lunatics for them to become a real menace to normal, sane people. I see no realistic option for the future other than to grant the wish of so many wingnuts: give, lease, or sell them part of Texas (or wherever,) let them secede, and make sure they can't come back.

[debo]

The "teachers should be armed" argument makes me so freaking uncomfortable considering how insane some teachers are where I went to school.

[thephoenixson28]

so its okay to you that any psychopathic american can get a gun as easy as they can now?... wouldnt you rather have a psych eval and more screening done? especially if you have 2 kids, a friggin elementary school was just shot up. it wont stop you from owning your gun at all, and keep them out of the hands of ppl who INTEND to do harm with them.

Do you think that's really going to make a difference. Don't you think that they can get a gun wherever if they really wanted to. You can evaluate anyone and they can get a gun, and one day go mentally insane. They already keep it away from people that already been in prison, what more do you want.

[thephoenixson28]

Beef up the security everywhere. I don't know how this guy can just walk into a school heavily armed, and kill a bunch of kids. My point is, how will you stop anyone Criminals,Murderers,Drug dealers or anyone from getting a gun. If anything your keeping it from the people that need the protection from these types of people.

[Scully in 2012]

No, we shouldn't claim it's the car. We should claim it's a mentally unstable individual operating something that they shouldn't be allowed to operate.

You take away the "something" and the situation doesn't exist. No cars for intoxicated people, no guns for those who don't fall under the decided upon policy.

At least you can make sense of it...So many others cannot.

Depending on the state there are many regulations with regards to firearms - CA has many. Federal law -Any person previously determined to have severe mental issues cannot own a firearm.

The sad fact is that no matter what regulations are imposed the criminals will still get whatever they want...just like drugs.

[jonnydanger1]

this is such a redundant stance. MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO GET GUNS! its like "oh, car accidents happen, and ppl die. deal with it" instead of "car accidents happen, lets take measures to lower the chances of them happening or injuries from them". how would strict gun laws hamper law abiding citizens? if their law abiding, theres no reason for them not to have a gun unless they are mentally unstable. its like saying "lets not increase the punishment for drinking and driving" or "lets not take measures to prevent drinking and driving"

I'm not opposed to more rigorous screening, however I think they background check already. The problem is that many of these events happen by people with no criminal record and aren't visibly 'insane' enough to not pass screening. The bottom line for me is, if someone is crazy enough to shoot up a school, they will shoot up a school, whether there is a complete ban on guns or their is no gun control. I don't want to see a good citizens deterred from owning a gun to protect their families because of an unnecessarily rigorous gun control policy. You can try to cherry coat your idea of gun control as a means to make it harder for crazy people to get guns, but the reality is that they will find a way. If there were good adult citizens with guns on that campus, maybe the shooter wouldn't of been able to GTA style walk in a start shooting people with no resistance.

[MagicHero3]

Do you think that's really going to make a difference. Don't you think that they can get a gun wherever if they really wanted to. You can evaluate anyone and they can get a gun, and one day go mentally insane. They already keep it away from people that already been in prison, what more do you want.

dont limit it to only ppl who have been in prison. im supporting the idea "increase screenings and gun laws" to make it harder to obtain guns. How will we do that? I cant say right now. Im not a lawmaker, but the conversation needs to happen. right now, yes, its mad easy to get a gun. what me and others in this forum suggest is make it HARD to get a gun. this wont eliminate crazy ppl, but it makes it less likely for events like this to occur. the kid who shot up the movie theatre- bought large automatic weapons intended for killing masses of ppl at a time from friggin hunting stores. get rid of those guns, limit them to law enforcement. NOTHING will stop crazy ppl from being crazy, but we have to try to take away one of their tools of destruction. in this situation, yes its hard to prevent, esp since he was using handguns, and someone said they were stolen or something. cant prevent that. its just sad. but we have to try. we cant sit here with our thumbs up our ***** and claim theres nothing we can do.

[valade16]

No, we shouldn't claim it's the car. We should claim it's a mentally unstable individual operating something that they shouldn't be allowed to operate.

You take away the "something" and the situation doesn't exist. No cars for intoxicated people, no guns for those who don't fall under the decided upon policy.

A very poor analogy considering there are literally thousands upon thousands of drivers on the road who don't have legal authority to be on it.

We should create safeguards to make it more difficult for undesirables to obtain firearms, but we need to realize that even outlawing firearms entirely won't 100% stop people from getting them.

[Randy West]

No crazy people should ever be able to own firearms or obtain them in a perfect world. We live in a far from perfect world though and crazies and criminals will always be able to get what they want to achieve their goals.

I would like to keep the ability to lawfully obtain and have a weapon and be able to protect myself and family from those that would mean to do us harm.