Yet another shooting in America

[Skanky Vamp]

the guns, by serial number, can be traced back to the dealer who sold them

Right, that's my point. Instead of just saying "the guns were legal" they (being the news) should start saying where the guns were purchased. If you found out X% percent of the guns that were used in, for instance, school shootings come from nationwide chains then more pressure could be made on them. Gun stores seem to actually talk to and with their customers whereas the chains are more interested in turning sales.

Last time I was in Gander Mtn I was in and out with the Beretta in 20 minutes. When I purchased my other gun at a gun store (which subsequently burnt down as an idiot was using tracer rounds and caught the place on fire) I spent 20 minutes just talking with them and it had to be another 20 on the actual sale.

 

[white avenger]

Right, that's my point. Instead of just saying "the guns were legal" they (being the news) should start saying where the guns were purchased. If you found out X% percent of the guns that were used in, for instance, school shootings come from nationwide chains then more pressure could be made on them. Gun stores seem to actually talk to and with their customers whereas the chains are more interested in turning sales.

Last time I was in Gander Mtn I was in and out with the Beretta in 20 minutes. When I purchased my other gun at a gun store (which subsequently burnt down as an idiot was using tracer rounds and caught the place on fire) I spent 20 minutes just talking with them and it had to be another 20 on the actual sale.

With as many illegal sources for unregistered guns as there are throughout the U S, do you honestly believe that any two came from the same dealer? And as far as the dealer's responsibility goes (I'm talking about the LICENSED dealer here, not our car trunk guy) it ends when he goes through the legal procedure required by local, state, and Federal regulations. The only exception would be if he knowingly falsified his records. He has no more control over what happens to a gun, once it leaves his shop by way of a legal purchase, than a car dealer has over a car once the customer drives it off the lot.

Licensed firearms dealers are not the problem, any more than law abiding gun owners are, but, strangely enough, they will be the only ones affected by any new laws that Obama proposes and Congress passes. Until someone in power recognizes and acknowledges the simple fact that "gun free zones" has become synonymous with "shooting gallery" in this country, and starts doing something to change that simple fact, no matter how many new, more restrictive gun laws that Congress passes, the situation that leads to mass shootings is going to continue. If some nut case wants to commit "suicide by police officer" and, in so doing, gain a few days of notoriety in the American press, he is going to do it, whether he uses a gun, or drives a car bomb into a gathered crowd somewhere.

And, incidentally, the difference in the amount of time that it took you to buy a gun in a big chain store as opposed to a local gun shop has more to do with the efficiency of the person filling out the paperwork. The same questions are asked, and the sale is reported in exactly the same way both places. It's no different than getting served faster in one restaurant that another.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

illegal sources for unregistered guns as there are throughout the U S, do you honestly believe that any two came from the same dealer.
And, incidentally, the difference in the amount of time that it took you to buy a gun in a big chain store as opposed to a local gun shop has more to do with the efficiency of the person filling out the paperwork.

That's my point, they said that '80%' or some such of the school shootings are from legal, registered guns. Where did they buy them is my question, because I think it matters.

I have NEVER had a person fill out paperwork in a chain store.. I do it all myself electronically. I even bought a gun for someone else, with them telling me, in front of the 'cashier' want they wanted and I filled out all the paperwork etc. That's a problem. I should have never been allowed to buy it without them at least asking me some questions as to what was going on and what I was doing.

That's why I would be curious to see where they were coming from, and how many were coming from these big chain sporting gun stores.

 

[white avenger]

That's my point, they said that '80%' or some such of the school shootings are from legal, registered guns. Where did they buy them is my question, because I think it matters.

This is another case of the facts being accurate, but also misleading. I can't remember the details of all of the shootings, but the guns used at Columbine were bought by an 18 year old girlfriend of one of the boys. The guns that Lanza used at Sandy Hook were obtained by murdering their rightful owner, his mother. In those two cases, at least, the guns were legally obtained, certainly, but not by the shooters themselves, who, in both cases, would not have been legally able to buy them themselves, in the former case because both boys were underage, and in the latter because of Lanza having been undergoing psychological therapy. Both cases involved legally owned and registered firearms, but not legally owned by or registered to, the shooters, so they were, in fact, illegally obtained. No waiting periods or background checks would have mattered, because the shooters weren't the people doing the buying.

 

[nightshade]

Would restricting where you can buy guns, and then having to register an interest in buying one, then waiting a certain time, say 7 days minimum, while all checks are carried out, before you can buy one be of any benefit?

Also post purchase having to have lessons on gun use for a set about of time. Maybe not each time you get a gun but each time you purchase a different type, the store could work with a company that does the lessons and automatically book you in, you have a database of who owns which type of gun and if it's a new type then you're automatically booked on the course.

Obviously this wouldn't work for older owners, but all new owners. Then given time it would be everyone as the generations went on. I don't see this as a quick fix thing, but something you have to bring in and allow time to help change.

Start with introducing laws for the younger generation, those about to be able to buy their first firearm. (not sure on how old you have to be, but maybe making an older age limit)

 

[Skanky Vamp]

but the guns used at Columbine were bought by an 18 year old girlfriend of one of the boys. The guns that Lanza used at Sandy Hook were obtained by murdering their rightful owner, his mother.

That's my point. Saying where the guns came from. When you hear or read the news the vast majority of the time they only say that the guns were legally purchased. It manufacturers a false problem in so doing. But if I go any further as to why I think that is I run the risk of wearing my tinfoil hat and start to spout conspiracies. So I will leave it at that. It's my opinion the media should make it known(or mokre widely known) from whence the guns came.

 

[Mr Trick]

Not to disagree with you, because I really don't, but it's pretty easy for everyone to go around saying "America's doing nothing" but do you really know they're doing nothing? Gun control & school violence is a huge topic here, and just because you don't see media coverage of it because it doesn't glue eyeballs to tv screens the way a shooting does, doesn't mean no one is doing anything.

I do think that America is trying to do something about gun control because at the end of the day when these deaths increase why wouldn't you. The problem is that the laws when set in stone are so hard to change, and also there's still a massive resistence to it from a core part of the county. I would like to think that most Americans want things to change, but I can't really say that for sure.

 

[white avenger]

I do think that America is trying to do something about gun control because at the end of the day when these deaths increase why wouldn't you. The problem is that the laws when set in stone are so hard to change, and also there's still a massive resistance to it from a core part of the county. I would like to think that most Americans want things to change, but I can't really say that for sure.

It isn't a question of laws, either being set in stone, or rewritten when changing conditions dictate. In America, unlike, as far as I know, any other nation in the world, the right of an honest citizen to own a firearm, or several, or even a full blown arsenal, if they can afford to do so, is a right acknowledged, not granted, by our government through the Bill of Rights, and a lot of people, myself included, feel that, if we allow those in power to take away or significantly change one of those rights, what is to stop them from taking others? The general feeling is that there have been too many examples throughout history, all over the world, where disarming the common citizens is the first step that leads to genocide, to ignore.

And as for the number of gun deaths here increasing, according to this article:

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

exactly the opposite is the truth. What has increased is the tendency of the news media to sensationalize every event such as the school shootings, and to glorify the shooters.

 

[Mr Trick]

It isn't a question of laws, either being set in stone, or rewritten when changing conditions dictate. In America, unlike, as far as I know, any other nation in the world, the right of an honest citizen to own a firearm, or several, or even a full blown arsenal, if they can afford to do so, is a right acknowledged, not granted, by our government through the Bill of Rights, and a lot of people, myself included, feel that, if we allow those in power to take away or significantly change one of those rights, what is to stop them from taking others? The general feeling is that there have been too many examples throughout history, all over the world, where disarming the common citizens is the first step that leads to genocide, to ignore.

And as for the number of gun deaths here increasing, according to this article:

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

exactly the opposite is the truth. What has increased is the tendency of the news media to sensationalize every event such as the school shootings, and to glorify the shooters.

Fair enough, but I still think this idea of people arming themselves for whatever reason just breeds a negative culture and fear. I guess if people don't use the gun unless its like a life or death thing then that is fine, but I don't think that is the reality.

 

[GwenRaiden]

Yes - I definitely believe if the media's joyous reporting of fatal shootings wasn't so sensationalised, and if the anchors and reporters didn't act so besotted with the shooter, then that would be a step in the right direction. These sociopathic egomaniacs must actually enjoy seeing loved ones breaking down in tears live on air. Treat the event and the people involved with respect, the way any decent human being would when someone dies. I can't watch stuff like that on TV anymore - the helicopters flying overhead to get good shots of children fleeing, the footage aired over and over again filmed on mobiles phones from inside the school - a headline and some written information is enough for me. Media releasing the shooter's manifestos that have been sent to them, is unreal. You're playing right into their hands and giving them exactly what they want. Sure, the media industry is a competitive one, but surely these people should operate using a moral code when it comes to death and glamourising killers. I don't even think the problem with media is solely its sensational reporting of shootings and the danger of inspiring copycats, but the rolling news when these killings have happened, the hyper-coverage, the same types of interviews with children crying about their dead friends, the same race to find out the killer's name and their tactics - they are normalising these events. It shouldn't be allowed, nor should we accept it. Stop tuning in.

 

[Mr Trick]

That is true the coverage in America is really overboard. We can be quite bad over here, but nothing like as bad. I mean sticking microphones in front of tramatrised children is just disgusting.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

I guess if people don't use the gun unless its like a life or death thing then that is fine, but I don't think that is the reality.

Of course it's not reality. I use mine at least twice a month. Most people that own guns use them.

breeds a negative culture and fear

For me it breeds a feeling of well being. It feels amazing shooting. And it can really lift your spirits after a tough day. Plus the added feeling of safety and security when I need it.

edit: and self confidence too! aiming and hitting the mark. It's very rewarding. The... pleasure you feel from it.

 

[Mr Trick]

Of course it's not reality. I use mine at least twice a month. Most people that own guns use them.


For me it breeds a feeling of well being. It feels amazing shooting. And it can really lift your spirits after a tough day. Plus the added feeling of safety and security when I need it.

edit: and self confidence too! aiming and hitting the mark. It's very rewarding. The... pleasure you feel from it.

Well I suppose if you choose to engage with them as Sport then that is up to you, but I don't see the appeal of that kind of thing, and just see it as needless.

I respectivelly disagree on your second point.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

just see it as needless.

That's the point in it being recreation. No different than laying on the couch watching football. It's all needless recreational activities that make you feel- something- as you do it.

 

[Mr Trick]

That's the point in it being recreation. No different than laying on the couch watching football. It's all needless recreational activities that make you feel- something- as you do it.

But without pointing out the obverous if I'm on the couch watching Football I am not endanging anyone's life, or at least there isn't that possibility.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

But without pointing out the obverous if I'm on the couch watching Football I am not endanging anyone's life, or at least there isn't that possibility.

Without pointing out the obverous I am not endanging anyone's life when I go shooting. In fact I am honing my skills to save lives if the need be. And unlike the people you see on TV shooting up schools, I am the majority- they are the minority. If they allowed people like me, who've been properly trained and practice shooting, in and at schools you would see less shooting at schools. Without pointing out the obverous.

 

[Mr Trick]

Without pointing out the obverous I am not endanging anyone's life when I go shooting. In fact I am honing my skills to save lives if the need be. And unlike the people you see on TV shooting up schools, I am the majority- they are the minority. If they allowed people like me, who've been properly trained and practice shooting, in and at schools you would see less shooting at schools. Without pointing out the obverous.

But is that not why we have Police/Army etc..? You raise an interesting point, but its not something I agree with.
 
@Mr. Pole You may have something but that's a different debate. In England in most cases I think the Police force do the best they can but are often cripled by a poor system.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

You may have something but that's a different debate.

It's the same debate.. should all school institutions have armed police/guards and not just Paul Blart: Mall Cop. Umpqua College considered armed guards in the past but dismissed the idea feeling they were not needed.

 

[white avenger]

I still think this idea of people arming themselves for whatever reason just breeds a negative culture and fear. I guess if people don't use the gun unless its like a life or death thing then that is fine, but I don't think that is the reality.

Do you consider Switzerland to be a negative culture? There, the majority of men between 20 and 30 are required to maintain an assault rifle and ammunition in their home, and they have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe.

Well I suppose if you choose to engage with them as Sport then that is up to you, but I don't see the appeal of that kind of thing, and just see it as needless.

And why should you have to? To me, the only thing more boring than watching a football game is watching a baseball game. That's diversity, and without it, this would be a far worse place than it currently is. I used to compete in bowling pin shoots, and enjoyed the hell out of it, whereas you would almost certainly hate it.

But is that not why we have Police/Army etc..?

This is a terrible misconception, probably begun by all the police movies and TV shows. The police do not stop criminals. In addition, they are under no legal obligation to protect any individual, even if they see a crime in progress. The police investigate crime after the fact. They interview the shop owner who has been robbed, the co-ed who was mugged and raped, and the witness who found the dead body. The real fact is that 99% of the time that a crime in progress has been stopped, it has been stopped by a private citizen, far more often than not, without any shots being fired.

It's the same debate.. should all school institutions have armed police/guards and not just Paul Blart: Mall Cop. Umpqua College considered armed guards in the past but dismissed the idea feeling they were not needed.

No one questions having armed guards in a bank or jewelry store. Do you consider a dozen children's lives less precious than stacks of printed paper and faceted crystal? If your answer is "yes," then we don't need guards at schools, malls, and other gun free zones. If your answer is "no," there was no reason to ask in the first place.

 

[Mr Trick]

1. Didn't know that about Switzerland thanks for the info. In that case I would put it down to a different in culture, which is what I was thinking it largely was anyway.

2. Well that's your personally taste on Football, I don't agree, but I don't see what it has to do with this discussion. Point is by just watching something you are not in danger of doing any harm.

3. Maybe, maybe not, but in theory that is what the police are there for. The point is even if they are terrible at their jobs that would still be no excuse for people taking matters into their own hands, that would just be anarchy.