Should the Sandy Hook School shooting have any effect on gun control in the US? - Page 2

Should the Sandy Hook School shooting have any effect on gun control in the US?

This is a discussion on Should the Sandy Hook School shooting have any effect on gun control in the US? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I voted #1 time to actually allow the 2nd amendment to work the way it was written,SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED...

View Poll Results: Should Newtown have an effect on Gun Control laws in this country

Voters
132. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    12 9.09%
  • No

    113 85.61%
  • Maybe, with exceptions

    5 3.79%
  • Undecided

    2 1.52%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24
Like Tree13Likes

Thread: Should the Sandy Hook School shooting have any effect on gun control in the US?

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    I voted #1 time to actually allow the 2nd amendment to work the way it was written,SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
    scgunlover1 likes this.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array Spirit51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    2,248
    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.
    A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
    Susan B. Anthony
    A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
    Robert Heinlein

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array multistage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NW Iowa
    Posts
    2,499
    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.

  4. #19
    Member Array Ransom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by peckman28 View Post
    I voted "yes". It is time to abolish gun-free zones and shelve that stupid, naive, utopian concept forever.
    +1 -- same here.

  5. #20
    PM
    PM is offline
    Senior Member Array PM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    670
    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.

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Thompson View Post
    I say no, if only because the issue with Sandy Brook goes well beyond who gets to buy what guns. And what makes anyone think more restrictive laws will make a bit of difference? The Connecticut governor is on the anti-gun bandwagon with this one, and Connecticut already has some of the most stringent gun laws in the US. Did it matter? If Connecticut’s own laws couldn’t stop a psychopath from murdering innocent children, what would be the point in applying more stringent laws at a Federal level? Gun laws only apply to law-abiding citizens and that’s assuming those citizens choose to comply. The Government could toss the 2nd Amendment out the window, ban the possession of ALL guns and confiscate every firearm, but that only keeps the guns out of the hands of the citizens who turn theirs in. Does anyone really think the armed criminals are going to comply? The "assault weapons" argument, is a joke on so many levels and there’s a fact that most of the media and most Government officials choose to ignore. Most violent crimes involving firearms are not committed with fully automatic weapons partly because they’re REALLY FREAKING HARD TO GET, and partly because criminals tend to carry guns that can be easily concealed. Walking down the street with an AK draws attention to oneself.
    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.
    You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, "I have lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along." . . . You must do the thing you think you cannot do. Eleanor Roosevelt

  7. #22
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,526
    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.
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

  8. #23
    Distinguished Member Array RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,508
    Ya think ya' might get different responses in a forum not titled Defensive carry?
    "When those who are governed do too little, those who govern can, and will, do too much." Ronald Reagan

    Do what you can; then do what you must

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,526
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    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.
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

gun control commercial
,
guns sales up since sandy brook shooting
,
how did sandy hook effect gun control
,
how did the sandy hook shooting effect the second amendment
,
how did the sandy hooke school shooting affect schools
,
how has the sandy hook shooting effect the gun control now
,
sandy brook shooting and gun control
,
sandy hook has no effect on guns
,

sandy hook shooting effcts gun control

,

statement on gun control after the shooting at sandy brook

,
what affects did sandy hook shooting have on gun control
,
what effect in the us schools have about the sandy hook shooting
Click on a term to search for related topics.