No, those are real statistics, like it or not.

There are more people out there with gun on them than you'd care to know. Killing by them hasn't gone up, or started for that matter.

 

Can you show us some evidence that there are more people legally carrying guns than driving? Or am I misunderstanding you?

That sounds like a stretch. I need examples of actual cases so I know I'm understanding you correctly.

 

This case right here in Santa Fe is a clear case of an irresponsible gun owner. I can’t help but think that if his father would have been more responsible with his weapons that this may not have happened. Am I absolutely 100% certain of that? Not even slightly. But at a time when the narrative is how can we protect our kids if we aren’t looking at what we are doing ourselves as parents then how can we look to anyone else to protect our kids? If we need to protect our kids from themselves then we as parents need to be doing much better to do so. It’s like I mentioned earlier, I am far from parent of the century but I would know for a fact if I needed to make sure my kids didn’t need access to my alcohol, car keys or guns. IMO at the very least that is a start. And I guarantee if I know the punishment for me allowing my mentally unstable kid to use my dangerous tools to wreak havoc on society then I will be even more diligent in protecting my kid from themself and society.

Are you saying it's the guns fault?

I believe a big part of the problem is a gun culture that demands unfettered access to any and all guns without mandatory checks on safety. Granted, that culture is fueled by "non-profits" that have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. They have convinced people that ANY checks on safety or limits on gun types will result in the confiscation of all guns. The result is large numbers of people that do not respect guns. "It's my right to own a gun, 'nuff said. Pry it out of my cold, dead hands."

 

That makes pro-gun, responsible owners like me pretty angry.

The SROs that I know are also police officers. I’ve always felt like SROs make a ton of sense based on my own experience with SROs. I never knew it was a political position appointed to those who don’t have much experience as a real cop.

 

How did you come to that conclusion?

I believe a big part of the problem is a gun culture that demands unfettered access to any and all guns without mandatory checks on safety. Granted, that culture is fueled by "non-profits" that have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. They have convinced people that ANY checks on safety or limits on gun types will result in the confiscation of all guns. The result is large numbers of people that do not respect guns. "It's my right to own a gun, 'nuff said. Pry it out of my cold, dead hands."

 

That makes pro-gun, responsible owners like me pretty angry.

 

What law that you would like to add would have prevented this?

How did you come to that conclusion?

 

I may have misread what you said in your post.

What law that you would like to add would have prevented this?

This? By that do you mean only this event or the mass shootings that have been happening at schools, colleges, churches, movie theatres and concert venues?

I may have misread what you said in your post.

 

To be clear everyone, SROs are often some of the best Officers on the force that are well suited for volatile, political environments but they are not normally your former Snipers, Army Rangers, Hong Kong Phooeys, and Tackleberrys.

Of course there are differences in those other countries and their societies and cultures. However, they do have people who have the same issues as we do. They don't have the gun violence.

 

If we really want to try and put a stop to this garbage, don't we owe it to our children to study those countries, their cultures, and their laws to see what could (or could not) work here?

Edited May 22, 20188 yr by UKMustangFan

DCF removes children from homes all of the time without due process for the parents, all in the name of protecting the kids. Law enforcement has been given the power to remove weapons from people deemed dangerous to themselves or the general public under the same blanket.

 

I'm not saying I agree with it. Just reporting. But these are the cans that get opened when looking for instant fixes to complex problems.

 

Can’t speak for where you live, but in Kentucky, if the Cabinet for Health and Family Services wants to take kids from a home, the county has to have to have a Temporary Removal Hearing to determine if a child is at risk and then ultimately a full adjudication to determine if neglect or abuse actually occurred. Parents are given access to court-appointed free attorneys and a full discovery process of the county’s case.

 

There is a boatload of due process there.

Can’t speak for where you live, but in Kentucky, if the Cabinet for Health and Family Services wants to take kids from a home, the county has to have to have a Temporary Removal Hearing to determine if a child is at risk and then ultimately a full adjudication to determine if neglect or abuse actually occurred. Parents are given access to court-appointed free attorneys and a full discovery process of the county’s case.

 

There is a boatload of due process there.

 

I know we are way off topic but when it comes to family court there may be a boatload of due process but in my opinion it is often for show and the court does whatever the court wants to do period.

If those numbers include illegally owned guns then I’d be curious to know how many unlicensed drivers or uninsured drivers are included in those numbers as well. I’m certain the illegal numbers outweigh the illegal drivers numbers but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a large amount of illegal drivers included in those numbers.

 

Could be, I'd have to see the actual breakdown.

Of course there are differences in those other countries and their societies and cultures. However, they do have people who have the same issues as we do. They don't have the gun violence.

 

If we really want to try and put a stop to this garbage, don't we owe it our children to study those countries, their cultures, and their laws to see what could (or could not) work here?

 

At the very least to do so isn’t hurting a thing at all.

To be clear everyone, SROs are often some of the best Officers on the force that are well suited for volatile, political environments but they are not normally your former Snipers, Army Rangers, Hong Kong Phooeys, and Tackleberrys.

 

Gotcha. Okay. Yeah I was thinking SROs weren’t Elite trained members of the armed force. Having Elite trained members of the armed forces as SROs is something that I would love.

Of course there are differences in those other countries and their societies and cultures. However, they do have people who have the same issues as we do. They don't have the gun violence.

 

If we really want to try and put a stop to this garbage, don't we owe it to our children to study those countries, their cultures, and their laws to see what could (or could not) work here?

 

Again, if we were serious about this issue we would put two or three well trained, armed soldiers/officers in every school until we figured out how to address the issue for the long term.

 

I took this from one of our other threads on the same topic but it is worth repeating:

 

If we want to keep our schools safe it is going to have to be a multi-faceted approach that first and foremost includes boots on the ground (armed men and women in every school in America).

 

Or, we just need to admit that we're okay with an occasional school shooting and will just deal with the aftermath of it.