Advocates of gun control are blaming guns for the recent killing of 26 people at a school in Connecticut. But could gun control supporters themselves be the ones to blame for the death toll? The Gun Free School Zone Act prevents teachers from having guns ready to defend their students. The law, pushed by gun control advocates, makes students and teachers vulnerable and completely reliant on the police for their protection. How many students would have died if one or two of the teachers were able to put an end to the shooting spree as soon as they heard the first shots being fired? What if there were locked compartments hidden in some of the classroom walls, with a 4-digit combination lock and keys? Teachers who wished to have a gun with them could take a training course to be ready to respond to any situation that could arise. Even just one or two armed teachers could make all the difference. http://www.firearmscoalition.org/in...-zone-act&catid=19:the-knox-update&Itemid=144
The reason these shootings are happening has a psychological reason. What has changed since the fifties? Everything, especially in the media (television/movies became violent) and violent computer games, and arrogant news media, and just arrogance and also social control, an anti-social society. A by mind control driven society, and by repeating the same violent movies and compter games and the sick television programming you get copycat behaviour. Guns are in the world/country for centuries, not mass media and movies and computer games. And another thing that has changed over the past decade is all the darkness in the media and the disappearance of green (clearings, artificial environment), lots of imperialistic psywar, the red, white, black colour combinations, Youtube, Google, new media is using it in mass since 2000, this does something to the mind of people/masses, and there are a few which minds are becoming chaotic. Psychologcal change in their minds is happening This society has become artificial, unnatural and has hardened, the hardening in society. Establishment/politics/the mass media will never go in detail about their creation, they will not explain what for world they have created around us. Compare the atmosphere of the fifties to the current society, completely has turned 180 degrees, an upside down society. The psychological warfare is what has caused all kinds of mental behaviour changes. They are putting the people into a war kind of state (because they need fight in the people, they do not want civilisation, they need chaos as well) The rulers have altered society to get control over it. They cause chaos in all kinds of ways (ecological, economical, social) This system/society has become evil, tyrannical in nature. The solution is return of civilisation (politics and all system created media are the problem) For example, the Amish people do not have all these problems, no tv, no compter games, no movies, no psywar (not that we have to return to the year 1800)
Is there any correlation between gun free zones/areas/places and shooters with murderous intent? Read an article stating that there are seven theaters in Aurora, Colorado where the Batman movie was playing and the Batman movie mass murderer picked the only one of the seven that prohibited law abiding citizens to lawfully conceal carry. It was not the closest one to his residence and it was approximately the same distance to the largest theater in Colorado. Yet he chose (or lucked into if you believe he didn't plan it) the only one protecting their patrons with a sign. Never been to that city but if this is accurate either criminals don't quite understand the intent of this law or are using it to their deadly advantage.
Granny says, "Dat's right - there oughta be a law against sellin' guns to people with crazies in dey's family... After School Massacre, Mourning and Calls for Action December 15, 2012 Police have not yet released all the names of the victims of a mass shooting at an elementary school in the northeastern state of Connecticut, but some reports have emerged on school staff slain as they tried to protect the children. The massacre has renewed calls for stronger gun control laws in the U.S. See also: Mass Killings in US Happening More Frequently December 14, 2012 - Mass killings in the U.S., like Friday's schoolhouse slaughter, have become a troubling and recurring fact of life in America.
Liberal gun control policies are making killing sprees far more deadly than they would otherwise be. Then, when so many defenseless people can be so easily killed by a psycopath, who just ignores the liberal "you can't bring a gun here" laws, liberals have the audacity to blame the guns themselves for these deadly killing sprees! No, it is idiotic misguided gun control laws that are taking away the ability of people to defend themselves. A gun might be responsible for the first 2 or 3 people who died in this killing spree. But for the additional 24 shootings after that, it is the policy pushed by anti-gun politicians which is to blame. Liberals are causing much of the gun crime, not to mention rapes of vulnerable women, with their misguided policies. If anything, this tragedy should prove that the police cannot be relied upon for immediate protection.
If the kid didn''t have access to the guns in the first place, this might have never happened. The guns used were legally purchased and owned by his law abiding mother, who for some unknown reason allowed them to fall into his hands and used to butcher her and all the other unfortunates at the school. Teachers are there to teach, not to act as security forces.
Look. I hate to tell you this. But when you are talking about "They" what you are really are talking about is "us". WE as a whole created this society. It wasn't imposed on us from somewhere else. We built it, we fed it, we as a whole created it.
Well sorry (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) but the cat is out of the bag now and you'll never, ever be able to stop people from getting guns. Period. Stop whining and (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing about it. You can make all the laws you want, but gun owners are not going to follow them and neither are the truly evil (*)(*)(*)(*)s. So you and liberal America can (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) and moan all you want. As far as I'm concerned my CIVIL RIGHT trumps a million children's deaths. Even if you banned gun ownership as a whole tomorrow. Tens of Millions of Americans would simply ignore it.
Attitudes like yours justify banning guns in this country. Don't worry, if the government decides that ownership of guns should be illegal, they'll take your guns whether or not you agree and I'll be right there to support them.
The "million kids vs my rights" was ridiculous. So you dont like someone's attitude and for that, you'd agree to trampling the 2nd amendment; same outta go for the first, or, if not, why not? You dont like someone's attitude to my ability to defend myself in the face of gravest extreme should be taken from me. If nobody has ever tried to kill you maybe this goes down easy for you; and besides you dont know me. If i get raped and tortured, what it is it to you?
Since the 50s the homicide rate didn't go up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade The question really is if you think the access of guns makes killing people easier or not. I think it's much harder to kill 20 or 30 people if only a select few (like police, hunters, etc.) have access to weapons, who not only have to go through a background check but also a training to get a permit for a gun. After all you need a permit for a car because we all realize it's a dangerous tool if you don't know what you're doing. This I don't understand either. Why do schools need a police force? I've not seen a single school employee who'd be security all my life here in central Europe. The only difference is here that when I go to school I know for a fact that nobody has a weapon, not due to regulations, but because it's so hard to get a hold of a simple gun, never mind an assault rifle and ammo used just a few days ago. This illusion seems to be widely spread: "If something bad happens I can stopp it with my gun." The police and every other armed force has to go through severe training to be remotely capable of doing that, and even then they sometimes shoot the wrong people. I am surprised that the average guy who owns a gun feels that they could do "the right thing" without the years and years of training so many people go through. Also: If you've ever had to use a weapon in a real life or death situation, you know that you're not calm and point at the "bad man" but you're shaking and you don't know what's going on - hence the required training.
Residents have been holding candlelit vigils in Newtown... Can an emboldened President Obama address gun control? 15 December 2012 - President Obama feels deeply about gun control but has been unable to address such an emotive issue See also: Newtown shootings: Democrats Malloy and Feinstein seek gun controls 16 December 2012 - Two senior US Democrats have called for stricter gun control following the elementary school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut.
I support background checks and training. I am just completely opposed to the central government taking on that role and effectively being given the discretionary power to not only decide who can own guns, but also the information of who owns guns. I am okay if the central government requires everyone to have background checks and training. But the actual responsibility should be delegated out at the local level, to local city/county governments and gun organisations. I think there are ways of making sure individuals get trained and checked without giving government this sole discretionary power. Many professions are granted the power to self-regulate their own trade (in law, medicine, etc). I do not see why local gun organisations cannot be trusted with the responsibility to regulate their own members and apply the law. To buy a gun, one could simply present a certificate from a locally known organisation. We also have to be careful what the law is, who will actually be denied the legal right to own a gun. I think it can generally be agreed that gun access could be restricted to people who have previously committed intentional murder, or used a weapon to commit a crime. And of course prisoners cannot have guns while they are in prison. But if we start further restricting who can have a gun, we start to go into dangerous territory. I would be okay if weapons which are only designed to kill a crowd of people were restricted/banned. What worries me is giving the government the power to make the determination of which weapons these actually are. The right to own semi-automatic guns should not be infringed. Just because a gun is an "assualt rifle" and/or can be used to "kill a lot of people quickly" does NOT give the government the right to ban it. The devil is in the details. In out attempts to make our country/world a safer place, I think we need to be very cautious that the powers we surrender to the government today will not one day threaten the freedom of our descendants. In retrospect, the few sporadic shootings we see today may be just a small price to pay compared to the horrors that could await us in the future if our society does abandon the individual right to own a gun.
The irony is, that's exactly how Liberals feel, and then some! http://www.politicalforum.com/gun-control/276203-gun-deaths-what-about-abortion.html
