Connecticut School Shooting

[nazz]

Here is the bottom line. Every single one of us is in complete agreement that we don't want something like this to ever happen again. It will of course but the question is what can we do to prevent it. I say we do whatever we can to at least reduce the incidence of these types of horrors.

When the shock of this tragedy as subsided complacency will set in again and nothing will be done. That is why I maintain the time to have a national conversation about this is NOW.

 

[Wirey]

All,

I didn't mean to come across as self-righteous, I'm just suggesting that until this isn't screamimngly fresh, maybe condolences are in order. Despite opinions, if the NRA started blowing off right now, I'd be offended as well. Same coin, different sides.

 

[Iti oj]

No one says gun control is going to fix all the problems. There will always be nutters. But the killing potential with modern firearms is so massive that we ignore that aspect of the issue at our peril.

Would the Arizona shooter have been able to kill six and wound thirteen in a matter of seconds with a billy club? Would the Aurora shooter have been able to kill twelve and wound dozens in a minute with a pair of switchblades? Come on, folks.

-Nato

Making a bomb is eazy...ish
and guns are easy to get illegally .. if some one is going on a killing spree they are going on a killing spree. What causes that is the real issue guns dont kill people. Bullets do. I meN people kill people.

 

[oldbadger]

If you don't mind me asking, what did you guys do?

A gunman at Hungerford used rifles and pistols on a killing spree in the 80's. As a result, firearm licences became much harder to obtain, all automatic rifles were banned and shotgun licences brought in.



Thomas Hamilton used handguns to kill many many teachers and children at a school in Scotland.

As a result, all handguns (apart from air-pistols of 6ft lbs power and specialised, very long-barrelled single shot pieces) were banned from Britain for all reasons, even olympic competitions.

Only military, police and government use remains.

There have still been mass shootings in Britain, since then.

I am very sad to hear of yet another mass murder.

 

[Iti oj]

This is horrid thos poor families poor children poor school poor community.

 

[Ken Brown]

I was physically shaken today when I first heard of this. My whole body reacted in a way I have never felt before. I feel so sorry for everyone affected by this horrific event it just makes me ill. KB

 

[-Peacemaker-]

edit: I misunderstood the president's comment. nevermind

 

[tumbleweed41]

‘Heal the brokenhearted and bind up their wounds’ This is Obama's attempt to quote Scripture (Psalm 147) in our politically correct society. How sad is it that he has to fear some atheists condemning his attempt to comfort the parents who'd just had their kid mudered at the Catholic elementary school if he should dare to use that dirty three letter word.

So, you're going to use this tragedy as an excuse to politicize.

1. Sandy Hook Elementary is a public school. Not a Catholic school.
2. The exact wording at the end of the speech, "May God bless the memory of the victims and, in the words of Scripture, heal the brokenhearted and bind up their wounds."

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It seems the biggest problems come when the mentally unstable or inadequate, become angry and have access to weapons such as this.

I doubt that these were his own, but he knew how to get at them.

I am sure that the number of these situations could be greatly reduced, but not eliminated.
Access and ownership restrictions come to mind, in households with such problems.

In the UK criminals have no problem obtaining guns... but it is very rare for them to use them on the general public.

The general public have great difficulty getting hold of guns, unless they want to become criminals themselves.

The result is, that when people completely lose their temper they only have household items. This can result in deaths, but rarely multiple ones.

The thing you will never stop is the criminally insane, who have time to plot these acts. Fortunately they are very rare.

 

[Revoltingest]

It seems the biggest problems come when the mentally unstable or inadequate, become angry and have access to weapons such as this.
I doubt that these were his own, but he knew how to get at them.
I am sure that the number of these situations could be greatly reduced, but not eliminated.
Access and ownership restrictions come to mind, in households with such problems.
In the UK criminals have no problem obtaining guns... but it is very rare for them to use them on the general public.
The general public have great difficulty getting hold of guns, unless they want to become criminals themselves.
The result is, that when people completely lose their temper they only have household items. This can result in deaths, but rarely multiple ones.
The thing you will never stop is the criminally insane, who have time to plot these acts. Fortunately they are very rare.

Don't tell anyone that this suggestion came from me, but we should consider greater public spending on mental health services, specifically
those which address people at risk for harming others. This mass shooting pales in comparison to the many singular acts of violence we suffer.
So there is great potential to curb carnage by identifying, helping, & perhaps controlling people who might harm others. Some might say this
is not a very libertarian approach, but it has the advantage of enhancing rational & peaceful interaction between citizens (a very libertarian goal).

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

From CNN ...

It sounded like "pops, gunshots," Janet Vollmer, a kindergarten teacher, said.
Vollmer locked her classroom doors, covered the windows and moved her 19 pupils toward the back of the room.

"We're going over in a safe area," she told the 5-year-olds. Then, she opened a book and started to read.

Outside Vollmer's classroom, a gunman was moving through the hallway of the one-story building.

That's a teacher.

L'shalom ... :group:

 

[oldbadger]

The general public have great difficulty getting hold of guns, unless they want to become criminals themselves.

Hi Terry...........

Despite our tighter controls on guns, you could have one within a very short time. For instance, if you wanted to take up clay-pigeon shooting you could apply, go through the checks to prove honesty, non-violence and health, and then get your gun safe fitted and inspected. The Police would then check that you really do go to a gun club, and bingo, you could start looking at suitable guns fairly soon. It's not hard for a genuine user to get a gun.

OK, so some genuine users have gone bonkers...... it's happened, but then, at least, the authorities can check to see if any of the rules were bent, broken or b-gg-red.

 

[oldbadger]

From CNN ...

​

That's a teacher.

L'shalom ... :group:

That's just ....... such a brave teacher!

 

[dust1n]

Don't tell anyone that this suggestion came from me, but we should consider greater public spending on mental health services, specifically
those which address people at risk for harming others. This mass shooting pales in comparison to the many singular acts of violence we suffer.
So there is great potential to curb carnage by identifying, helping, & perhaps controlling people who might harm others. Some might say this
is not a very libertarian approach, but it has the advantage of enhancing rational & peaceful interaction between citizens (a very libertarian goal).

Stop trying to address the issue and not the side effects.

 

[Copernicus]

Some people would say that we never get around to talking about gun control. Maybe calls for a moratorium on such discussion are motivated less by respect for the victims and their families, and more by the self-interests of the gun lobby who hope it'll just blow over again.

It blew over after Columbine. It blew over after Arizona. It blew over after Aurora.

I'm not trying to offer some facile answer that will cure man's inhumanity to man. I'm just trying to remind people that after every one of these tragedies, we tell ourselves there's absolutely nothing we can do to prevent this sort of tragedy.

We'll talk next time. That's a promise!

-Nato

The people who say that now is not the time for a debate over gun control and other possible solutions to these tragedies are absolutely correct about that. It is long past the time for that debate. What about our sensitivities towards the victims and families of the victims? Well, I doubt that they are scouring internet debate forums and finding themselves shocked and appalled by the insensitivity of the discussants. Everyone is horrified by these events, and this was surely the worst in the memory of most of us.

Revoltingest's suggestion that we should address the mental health issue is a good one, and it does not preclude addressing the type of weapons and ammunition that people can buy. Let's hope that the mental health solutions offer delivery options for people who cannot now afford to take advantage of them. As for weapons, it is easy to see that high-capacity ammunition magazines are unnecessary and dangerous items to allow for public sale. What legitimate private use could there be for a magazine that holds over 20 rounds? They should be banned. Ammunition designed to cause maximum damage to the body--a type that the shooter reportedly used in this incident--can and should be banned from public sale. That won't stop these incidents, but it might make them less frequent and less lethal.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

 

[Copernicus]

Neither. This isn't about posting signs. Crazy people aren't going to be stopped by them. Reducing the destructive power of weapons sold to the public and implementing better mental health screening might help to reduce the carnage and lessen the frequency of such massacres.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

You completely dodged the point

 

[Copernicus]

You completely dodged the point

I didn't answer the question, because it depended on a presupposition that I disagreed with. Neither sign addresses the issue of how to bring down the number of massacres or reduce the damage when they occur. We may need better security at schools. We may need greater restrictions on legal ownership of weapons. They are not mutually exclusive options. What signs we display is irrelevant.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I didn't answer the question, because it depended on a presupposition that I disagreed with. Neither sign addresses the issue of how to bring down the number of massacres or reduce the damage when they occur. We may need better security at schools. We may need greater restrictions on legal ownership of weapons. They are not mutually exclusive options. What signs we display is irrelevant.

The point isn't the signs, it's what the signs consist of.

What would be more likely to prevent another incident such as that? If the school's teachers were armed, or if guns weren't allowed on that property (which they weren't). This IS black and white.