Can we do more? Hell yes! Mental health evaluation is a good start, that's where mcpapa and I agree.

Agreed! People want to dismiss mental health, this is where it should start, but it should not end there either. If someone is in court using a mental problem as a defense, yes, that is an excuse. But to talk about the issues like these it is not an excuse, it's trying to find out why they did it, it's not just because "they were evil", WHY were they evil? And how can we stop this?

I don't see the president as exploiting anything here! No matter who the president is, he is in a very tough position, ignoring and not even hitting on the facts would be wrong, and does nothing for those who were slaughtered and their families.

 

What would you say if you were talking to these family members, and the others kids from that school and their families?

 

There was a thread started on here earlier that talks about how it was being politicized, yet the poster didn't just say a lawmaker, Senator or whoever is politicized it, they had to include the word democrat, now who is politicizing it? If a black lawmaker said or did something you didn't like, are you going the say "blacks" said this or that?

I wouldn't have politicized it, I can tell you that. I listened to his speech, I think he obviously politicized it and it's obvious gun control is going to play a big part of what he wants. I think the mental health issue is what needs to be addressed, hell, the glorification of the act on our 24/7 news channels needs more addressing than gun control.

 

The other thread was about what a Dem said, and let's face it, it isn't Republicans that want gun control or bans.

.223? Hunting ammo. Please, I think you don't get it GT. It isn't an assault weapon as it's been wrongly labeled. How do you know he didn't force his mother to give him access? How do you know they weren't locked up and he either found the combination or figured it out? Perhaps she was careless and didn't lock them up. You or I don't know yet and we may never know. Any of the scenarios aren't failures of the system.

 

Can we do more? Hell yes! Mental health evaluation is a good start, that's where mcpapa and I agree.

 

Again you put words into my post that didn't exist. See where this keeps going? I never said it was an assault riffle. I said there is no need for a weapon that has the ability to slaughter that many people in such quick fashion. The fact that you are quick to defend it as a hunting weapon only further proves my point. What exactly are people hunting that they need to put that many rounds in before it is dead? When you are willing to see the reality of the situation, let me know. I'm done until then...

Again you put words into my post that didn't exist. See where this keeps going? I never said it was an assault riffle. I said there is no need for a weapon that has the ability to slaughter that many people in such quick fashion. The fact that you are quick to defend it as a hunting weapon only further proves my point. What exactly are people hunting that they need to put that many rounds in before it is dead? When you are willing to see the reality of the situation, let me know. I'm done until then...

So you have a problem with semi-auto? That's worse than I originally thought. Good luck with that. Ever hunt GT? From your post, I'm betting no. If so, you're making zero sense.

I have guns, actually just put money down on a new HK 30, I am not worried about me being able to own and or carry my guns.

 

I will point out that in Colorado, the shooter had some theaters closer to his his home, why did he go out of his way to another? One thing is, the theater he went to did not allow concelled weapons while the others did not have such a ban, could it have played a part in where he started shooting?

 

Also, in Portland, someone with a CCL had his gun drawn, aimed it at the shooter, but couldn't get a clear shot. The shooter saw him, and for some reason the next shot fired was the shooter killing himself, I am sure the shooter realized he was finished after seeing the other guy with a gun aimed towards him.

I have guns, actually just put money down on a new HK 30, I am not worried about me being able to own and or carry my guns.

 

I will point out that in Colorado, the shooter had some theaters closer to his his home, why did he go out of his way to another? One thing is, the theater he went to did not allow concelled weapons while the others did not have such a ban, could it have played a part in where he started shooting?

 

Also, in Portland, someone with a CCL had his gun drawn, aimed it at the shooter, but couldn't get a clear shot. The shooter saw him, and for some reason the next shot fired was the shooter killing himself, I am sure the shooter realized he was finished after seeing the other guy with a gun aimed towards him.

While I agree with you, this administration will not allow CC in schools, movie theaters or other public places IMO. On the contrary, they don't like guns and want them gone. They just don't seem to get that whatever they do will only affect law abiding citizens. Sadly, criminals will always be able to get guns.

So you have a problem with semi-auto? That's worse than I originally thought. Good luck with that. Ever hunt GT? From your post, I'm betting no. If so, you're making zero sense.

 

Good luck with the overall safety of this country? Pretty much...

GT, he could have done the same with a pistol. I'd argue at the range he killed those people, he could have done it more easily. I know this won't fly with those on that side of the debate, but that weapon isn't the problem. It holds no more ammo, and does no more damage at close range than a handgun. I wish we could somehow secure schools better.

But it looks mean, so in their mind it's the problem. That's what we're dealing with.

Good luck with the overall safety of this country? Pretty much...

Come on, GT. You act as if you can't go anywhere. Look, sadly we have crazy people in this world that want to kill people. You can't live in fear. Overall, we're pretty damn safe in this country. These things are actually pretty rare. How many times have you been out and had a gun pulled on you? I bet mcpapa and I have had it happen more than you have.

Paraphrased from Twitter:

 

Somebody tries to set off a shoe bomb and now everybody getting on a plane has to take off their shoes. 31 school shootings since Columbine and still no change.

 

 

I could be flippant and say that it's simply a matter of priorities. That the National Rifle Association has considerably more resources than the National Shoe Association. But we're talking (sounds like some folks are, anyway) a Constitutional Amendment - one of the biggies. And that's not a simple matter. It calls for sensible and considerable debate.

 

I think folks are getting their camos in a wad because the President framed the debate in terms of protecting our children, and it was effective.

 

 

And for the record - again - I believe that there is a whole heck of a lot that needs to be done than proposing the taking of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines or whatever semantics you want to use, out of the hands of the general population.

Care to place a friendly wager on what he's going to do? Hell, an ice cream sundae is a good enough wager.

 

Sure. I'll go with "recommend the creation of an ad hoc bipartisan commission on violence".

GT, he could have done the same with a pistol. I'd argue at the range he killed those people, he could have done it more easily. I know this won't fly with those on that side of the debate, but that weapon isn't the problem. It holds no more ammo, and does no more damage at close range than a handgun. I wish we could somehow secure schools better.

 

If a pistol fits my description, so be it. Already up to two people putting their thoughts into what I post. Quick reminder of why I quit posting on politics and religion years ago...

Paraphrased from Twitter:

 

Somebody tries to set off a shoe bomb and now everybody getting on a plane has to take off their shoes. 31 school shootings since Columbine and still no change.

 

 

I could be flippant and say that it's simply a matter of priorities. That the National Rifle Association has considerably more resources than the National Shoe Association. But we're talking (sounds like some folks are, anyway) a Constitutional Amendment - one of the biggies. And that's not a simple matter. It calls for sensible and considerable debate.

 

I think folks are getting their camos in a wad because the President framed the debate in terms of protecting our children, and it was effective.

 

 

And for the record - again - I believe that there is a whole heck of a lot that needs to be done than proposing the taking of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines or whatever semantics you want to use, out of the hands of the general population.

We agree that many other things need to be addressed. But, let's face facts, Democrats have track record. Obama has been hinting at it for a while and tonight he made it rather obvious. Hard to blame anyone for calling as they see and hear it.

GT' date=' he could have done the same with a pistol. I'd argue at the range he killed those people, he could have done it more easily. I know this won't fly with those on that side of the debate, but that weapon isn't the problem. It holds no more ammo, and does no more damage at close range than a handgun. I wish we could somehow secure schools better.[/quote']

 

If I'm not mistaken he was carrying a gun that had a 30 round magazine. Do many pistols have a 30 round magazine?

 

So you know I'm not for or against any gun control. I don't really know what the best answer is I just wish there was a solution to stop these tragedies from happening.

Exploitation. Agenda. Politicization. I'm just not sure. I'm not convinced that what we are seeing isn't an emotional response by many to wish that we could go back in time and find a way to protect these angels better. Most of us feel this way. We just disagree on what form it should take.

 

1) Some get upset when "mental health" is mentioned. "These people are just evil. That's an excuse." Well, I don't buy it. For one, that leaves me helpless to deter the next tragedy. I've also seen good people do bad things as a result of mental illness.

2) Some want to ban guns outright. I own a gun that I practice with sparingly. It's for defense, though I used to use it quite a bit for pleasure. I don't NEED a gun. But man, I sure don't want to be a law abiding citizen that can't have a gun defending herself against a criminal that doesn't care about the legality of the weapon that they hold in their hands. We CAN ban guns. We just CAN'T get rid of them. A ban will only allow the inmates to run the prison.

3) Some want to make schools "more secure" and I bet without raising our taxes. It looks like this school had just installed a new security system that had but one flaw. Someone with a gun could shoot through a window and gain access anyway. Do we want bars on all doors/windows in our schools? Armed guards patrolling the halls? Or do we let those that would do us harm defeat us anyway, by shoving fear in our hearts and making us "live" less?

 

We DO need to examine the issues involved with this and similar tragedies and look to see if there is something that we can reasonably and sensibly do to make our schools and communities safer. But we cannot get anything accomplished by labeling and finger pointing. That's what I am so weary of. That, and looking at the faces of those sweet little babies and crying tears of sorrow...of imagining myself in my classroom trying to figure out a way to protect my own students.