WSJ on Limited Legislative Backlash Expected

After Colorado Theater Shooting, New Gun-Control Laws Are Unlikely - WSJ.com

This article concludes the likelihood of new gun control legislation low for various reasons. Both Anti and Pro activists are cited.

Quote:

---

The Aurora, Colo., shooting spree will fuel fresh calls for gun control, but changes in laws are unlikely, partly because of a lack of support for new measures in Congress and among the public at large, people on both sides of the debate said Friday.

---

I also found these statistics interesting.

Quote:

---

A Gallup poll last fall found, for the first time, majority opposition to a ban on semiautomatic guns or assault rifles, with 53% opposed and 43% supportive. In 1996, when the question was first asked, 57% of Americansbacked a ban.

The Gallup survey also found a record-low 26% of Americans favoring a ban on possession of handguns in the U.S. other than by police and other authorized people. It also found 47% of adults reporting that they currently have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property, the highest level since 1993.

---

There is no way to legislate against this kind of action. Someone committed to this kind of action will find a way to carry out their plan, with no regard for the rule of law. More laws would accomplish nothing except to further inconvenience those of us who would never even contemplate such depravity.

Someone smart and willing enough can find a way. Murderous violence ain't too hard to achieve, even if the weaponry is rocks, frying pans, a baseball bat, or whatever, particularly if the felon is altogether willing to die if need be in order to achieve his ends. About all that can be hoped for is the cretin isn't the only one armed, that citizens haven't been all emasculated ahead of the crime by their ostensible "leaders" who're polishing seats.

Laws only apply to the law-abiding. There is NO way to legislate against malice and stupidity. The perp could have achieved the same level of malice with ten bucks worth of gasoline and a match, and last I know, there is no restriction on buying gasoline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gasmitty

Laws only apply to the law-abiding. There is NO way to legislate against malice and stupidity.

---

Prohibition <> Inhibition, for the criminally-minded. You're exactly right. Murderer's will do what they'll do, ignoring the pretty little signs and minor future penalties placed in their way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airslot

There is no way to legislate against this kind of action. Someone committed to this kind of action will find a way to carry out their plan, with no regard for the rule of law. More laws would accomplish nothing except to further inconvenience those of us who would never even contemplate such depravity.

---

What makes you think that those trying to ban all firearms think it would have that effect? Many anti's don't care as much about controlling crime as the do controlling the people.

Michael

Politicians can try to tighten up the background check process all they want but how do they explain this guy? He had no prior criminal history that would have kept him from possessing firearms. From what we have heard from the mother, "you have the right guy," she knew he was capable of some major malfunction. So if the politicians want to tinker with the background check, maybe try to have a better system of documenting the mentally ill. But there is a problem with that. It is harder than ever to commit someone to an institution for mental issues because of the litigious society we live in. There are shrinks out there who are afraid of being sued for fear of a correct diagnosis and would rather let someone who is unstable fall through the cracks.

These situations only shine a light on the need for individuals to be able to defend themselves. That is still no guarantee, but if I were in that situation I'd much rather have a gun in my hand than a box of popcorn. At least you'd have a chance.

CRIMINALS WILL GET GUNS,,,, laws will ONLY EFFECT HONEST LAW ABIDING
AMERICANS. Those who break the law will STEAL, or buy stolen guns thus
leaving the law abiding people as LAMBS for slaughter. My thoughts are ,,,,,
if several folks with CWP's had been in the theater maybe they could have
ENDED the shooting SOONER.

Saying that,,,, I do believe there WILL BE A PUSH for legislation to stop Internet purchasing,
bulk ammo buying & high capacity magazines FIRST,,,, then assault rifles with handguns
coming last,,,,, especially if Obama is re-elected.

Would a gun ban have stopped Ted Bundy, the Green River Killer, Jeffery Dahmer or any other mass murderers? After all they did not need guns for their murderous sprees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msgt/ret

Would a gun ban have stopped Ted Bundy, the Green River Killer, Jeffery Dahmer or any other mass murderers? After all they did not need guns for their murderous sprees.

---

Could have, yes.

You know, I had a little fear about a backlash for the community of law abiding gun owning folks. But honestly with CC permit holders way up, pretty much everywhere from what I've heard and gun sales being higher than ever I think its gonna be really really hard to actually get anything going. I think lots of americans are fed up with crap like this and realizing its up to them to truly protect themselves, and buying guns to do just that. Heck, EVERYBODY I know talks about at atleast wanting to get a gun or a permit to carry one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airslot

There is no way to legislate against this kind of action. Someone committed to this kind of action will find a way to carry out their plan, with no regard for the rule of law. More laws would accomplish nothing except to further inconvenience those of us who would never even contemplate such depravity.

---

I am not going to bash you, and appriciate your comment, but I believe they have legislated for this kind of action. If only 3% of the responsible population are allowed to carry in these large venues that are the most viable targets for this type of a tragedy to happen, then there would have been enough armed citizens present to put this person down before he killed so many. The uproar should be, Why Were There No Armed Citizens There To Stop This!

Killing people is against the law right? The tools used are a mute point. If they want to kill, they will finds the means necessary to make it happen....

How many laws were broken by this twisted person? Think having a few new laws to break would have stopped him? That is what is so hard for me to understand about the gun control crowd.