I voted #1 time to actually allow the 2nd amendment to work the way it was written,SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
I voted "No" because I don't think it is as much a gun problem as a mental health issue. I DO believe the "gun free" zones should disappear, but I don't think when people are talking about this they are thinking of that....they are thinking of "controling" guns in the private sector.
Connecticut should have no influence, but of course it will.
The liberal media is trying to set things up for a massive disarming. Ironic. They have caused America to arm herself like never before.
When you are a democrat and running for president, all you have to do is win OH and FL. The NE states and west coast states will always back you, and with OH and FL, you are set.
The same will hold true with new laws. This will be a huge fight, lots of power on both sides.
+1 -- same here.
Originally Posted by peckman28
In the usual use of the term: NO. Should it get gun laws changed: YES. Like GFZ law; most of the mass killings have happened in GFZ; therefore the GFZs need to be changed.
after the NFA act of 1934,I'm not aware of a crime involving a legally owned automatic weapon in the U.S. I might be wrong though.
Originally Posted by J.Thompson
NO! You do not take an isolated incident, or even a string of media sensationalized incidents and use that as a basis for new laws. In the overall scheme of things, it is insignificant by comparison. I know it sound's cold, and it certainly is not insignificant to those affected by these incidents, but One doe not make new laws in this day and age for an entire country based on the actions of a few!.
From the responses to letters sent to legislators that I have seen members post, it's almost like they accept that the laws are not working, and eliminating the tool altogether is the only way - follow in the footsteps of Canada, Europe, Australia, etc.
Yet by the same logic, the only tools that they are going to eliminate are those that 99.9% are owned by law abiding citizens (granted that if a ban/grab/turn 'em in happens, there will be a great many more defacto criminals) that would never consider doing such heinous act.
This country has far greater problems to deal with right now, than to tie up resources trying to figure out a solution to a problem that nobody can currently predict, anticipate, or counter with anything other than equal force on station and ready to respond without hesitation.
In all of the "Mass Shootings" that have taken place in the last 20 years, there were already a pile of laws, and checks in place to supposedly prevent it from occurring - yet it still happened. And if you dig deep enough into the lives of those people that committed these acts, it all boils down to parenting, and this sudden increase in "Special needs", "Challenged", "Attention Deficit" which all used to be treated by a smack with a ruler, or larger, to get their attention focused and try harder. Not prescriptions or touchy feeley psychological counseling - which has clearly proven to be ineffective. Pain reinforced discipline is not child abuse, and has proven to be extremely effective for the last 10,000 years in behavior modification.
This is not a tool problem, it is not a legal problem, it is a moral problem that started at least 2 generations ago when the full on "Let the Govt raise my children for me because I am to lazy/irresponsible/stupid to do it, no more discipline, and rapid decline in quality education" happened. The fact that the new rally cry of "For the safety of the Children" is not helping at all. I am not about to willingly give up my rights, or freedoms because because a child may be injured or killed by someone who went off the rails.
Getting rid of the tools, writing more laws is not going to stop, or even slow the problem of mass shootings, if there really is enough to be considered a problem. Look at the nation, and the unnatural deaths as a whole if you give "Mass shootings" their own category - defined as 1 or more persons shooting more than one person that they have no association with, and for no other criminal intent other than just shooting.
Lets not bring in the bible thumping into this. If religion to some entity works for you, great, but it is not the "lack of" in some people that is the source. You had better remember that this country was initially settled because of the whole "Freedom of Religion (or lack thereof)". If you look at the history of the world, more lives have been taken in the name of Religion than all other deaths not by natural causes combined, and it is still racking up huge numbers every single day - and this country is neither innocent or free of this crime.
Let the country mourn. At the same time remember that there are hundreds of other parents that are losing their sons and daughters every single day through other other tragedies that could have been prevented, never mind those sons and daughters that are dieing halfway across the globe protecting "American Interests - oil", which to me is a far greater tragedy - sons and daughters dieing to keep the pockets of Big Oil, the Auto Industry - ergo Politicians lined with money, for they are the ones making the decisions to send them abroad.
Ya think ya' might get different responses in a forum not titled Defensive carry?
Absolutely. Go to the opposite side of the spectrum and you will see the inverse of here.
Originally Posted by RightsEroding