WE: After school shooting in Connecticut, Piers Morgan blasts America’s ‘gun madness’

[KingGibbs]

Painkiller. Did you miss where I said "Not all?"

[Painkiller]

Painkiller. Did you miss where I said "Not all?"

No, I didn't, but both sides have their nuts. I have watched this play out on Facebook also, not just here. The first persons to bring up 'gun control' on Facebook were those who want certain types or all of guns banned. When 'gun owners' try to defend themselves, the other side hits us with 'all you can think of is your precious guns'

No, that's not all we think of. The irony in all this to me, is that after 9/11 for example many people who were for 'gun control' were also against ramped up security in airports and train stations. 'We can't give up our rights, because then the terrorists win' Why should it take me 30 minutes to get through customs? Intrusive searches...blah blah blah Remember? Now because of a few isolated incidents, which are admittedly tragic beyond belief...these same persons would gladly eliminate a right that Americans have enjoyed almost since our inception.

[Skinsfan In NM]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-...br /> NineItem

Just saying. If someone who is a very sick individual decides they are going to kill a lot of innocent people they are going to find a way to do it.

[MattFancy]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/katienotopou...after-shooting

Social media users around the country this weekend remarked on long lines and big crowds at gun stores, and wondered what connection those sales could have to Friday's horrific shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, in which a young man used his mother's semi-automatic rifle to murder 20 children and 6 adults.

Gun sales have at times spiked at times when talk of gun regulation turns serious — for instance, after President Barack Obama's first election — and gun owners believe they might soon be unable to obtain some heavy duty weaponry. The murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School prompted calls to revive the Clinton-era Assault Weapons Ban, though it's unclear whether any Republicans would support such a measure.

[KDawg]

First off, any kind of gun ban would be based on new guns entering the market. The assault rifle ban would keep new guns from hitting the shelves, but what's there can still be sold. Also keep in mind that those guns that are already owned will not be taken away from gun owners. People will buy assault rifles now just because their value will increase tenfold with a ban.

Our country set itself down this path years ago when the Constitution was written.

We are knee deep in the issue now, and we won't rid ourselves of guns simply by banning them now.

Bad guys will still find ways to get guns. The only thing that stricter gun laws will do is prevent law abiding citizens from having arms to protect themselves. The only thing that can stop a maniac is another person that is armed. I don't believe that's a good thing, but that's the place we're at right now, unfortunately.

I think an assault rifle ban might be a good start. It's a step in the right direction. But it will hardly correct the issue that is in front of us.

I think the first step is finding a way to secure our schools. That needs to be priority A, number 1. There is no other more pressing issue. Schools should be the absolute safest place to be. The second priority shouldn't necessarily be stricter gun laws (though, I don't believe stricter gun laws are a bad thing) but rather stricter checks on allowing people to purchase weapons (NOT JUST GUNS!!!!) legally. If you have any history of mental illness, you cannot own a weapon. If you're married and your spouse has any sort of mental history, you cannot purchase a weapon. If you have children and they have mental history, you may not purchase a weapon. If there is any misdemeanor or felony charges on your record, you shouldn't be able to own a weapon.

The problem isn't necessarily the guns, it's the easy access to guns, both legally and illegally. You'll never prevent the bad guys from getting weapons. They'll find a way. But you can limit the stream of their availability by selling to ONLY people that don't have a checkered history.

But even that won't fully stop these kinds of things from happening. Some whack jobs are completely "normal" and then one day they snap.

I'm not sure there is an answer to any of this... But there sure are a TON of questions.

[Painkiller]

KDawg, you get it. Thank you. You seem like somebody who is willing to discuss finding a realistic and attainable solution, not just something that makes us feel better inside.

Here is the problem in a nutshell.

One side: 'I hope now your finally ready and willing to sit down and seriously discuss banning guns'

The other side: 'I hope now your finally ready and willing to sit down and seriously discuss finding real solutions to our problems. Leave my guns alone'

When not enough people are saying: 'I hope now we are ready and willing to sit down and discuss real solutions to our problems, and any useful suggestions or ideas that could help, to seriously include those that have nothing to do with the guns themselves are off the table.'

[KingGibbs]

No, I didn't, but both sides have their nuts. I have watched this play out on Facebook also, not just here. The first persons to bring up 'gun control' on Facebook were those who want certain types or all of guns banned. When 'gun owners' try to defend themselves, the other side hits us with 'all you can think of is your precious guns'

No, that's not all we think of. The irony in all this to me, is that after 9/11 for example many people who were for 'gun control' were also against ramped up security in airports and train stations. 'We can't give up our rights, because then the terrorists win' Why should it take me 30 minutes to get through customs? Intrusive searches...blah blah blah Remember? Now because of a few isolated incidents, which are admittedly tragic beyond belief...these same persons would gladly eliminate a right that Americans have enjoyed almost since our inception.

I'm not one of those opposed to the security measures installed at airports, train stations, etc. I think it's ludicrous for anyone to complain about having to wait in line to ensure their safety.

To clear the air with you. I'm not advocating an all out gun ban (wouldn't oppose it either) but anyone opposing a assault weapons ban should have their head examined. Seriously. The only people that should have those weapons are military and police personnel.

[MattFancy]

I'm not one of those opposed to the security measures installed at airports, train stations, etc. I think it's ludicrous for anyone to complain about having to wait in line to ensure their safety.

To clear the air with you. I'm not advocating an all out gun ban (wouldn't oppose it either) but anyone opposing a assault weapons ban should have their head examined. Seriously. The only people that should have those weapons are military and police personnel.

Agree with you 100% on both points you raised.

I asked yesterday why anyone needs an assault rifle. I don't think I ever really got a response. It's because there is no logical reasoning for having one. What are you hunting that you need an AR-15?

[Thiebear]

To all of the people expressing the argument of

Even if we ban all guns tomorrow, there are millions of guns out there in the public, already, and those guns would still be there. Therefore, restricting guns cannot be allowed.

I would like to present a hypothetical argument:

Even if we could completely secure our nation from illegal immigration, there are millions of illegals out there in the public, already, and those illegals would still be there. Therefore, securing the border cannot be allowed.

Do y'all think that my argument makes sense?

wouldn't it be: Register the guns, Register the illegals
Remove the bad ones (Assault Rifle) (Felony convicted Illegals)
Keep the good ones (regular weapon) (useful to society/youngsters)
create a program going forward to help assimilate and create a safer pathway
(Smaller/Smarter guns) and or (More legal immigration to begin with)
turn in your old gun for newer safer / register to become a legal citizen and go through the steps
If you are caught as either: fine/sentence (like Virginia) is automatically higher. http://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/researc...uation2001.pdf

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

I always bring up that point when I hear someone say the black man is commtting heinous crimes. My response? "Meanwhile, the white man is going around committing mass murders." Followed by complete silence.

yeah, its the privileged position white males have in society. When one of these incidents happen, the first question is what was the person's mental state.

When a minority man kills someone in the inner city, its increase police presence and "why do THEY act that way."

Not saying anyone in here is doing that (havnet read all the posts) but its just funny how those are the different reactions.

[Painkiller]

I asked yesterday why anyone needs an assault rifle. I don't think I ever really got a response. It's because there is no logical reasoning for having one. What are you hunting that you need an AR-15?

The answer will frighten you, but ok. You have an assault rifle in case of serious and significant civil unrest. You have an assault riffle because they EXIST, and others will also have them, although they may have procured them by different means than you.

You don't need an assault rifle if you have total and complete faith that our government will take care of us no matter what happens. I don't have that much faith in the system.

[MattFancy]

The answer will frighten you, but ok. You have an assault rifle in case of serious and significant civil unrest. You have an assault riffle because they EXIST, and others will also have them, although they may have procured them by different means than you.

You don't need an assault rifle if you have total and complete faith that our government will take care of us no matter what happens. I don't have that much faith in the system.

See, I'm from SoMD, so I expected a response like this from that area. Not being disrespectful, but people in that area love their guns.

So you have an assault rifle because you think you need to protect yourself from the gov't?

[Painkiller]

To clear the air with you. I'm not advocating an all out gun ban (wouldn't oppose it either) but anyone opposing a assault weapons ban should have their head examined. Seriously. The only people that should have those weapons are military and police personnel.

but if there is an assault weapons ban, why would Police need them?

[Redskins Diehard]

Semi-automatic handguns have been around for over 100 years. Do you realize how much damage a well trained shooter with Colt 1911 and a couple of standard capacity magazines could do? Six round revolvers have been around for even longer. Six well placed shots could be six kills. See my point?

Yes, a 1911 would require a well trained shooter and how many magazine changes to discharge the same number of rounds? 6 well placed shots out of 6 taken can be 6 kills....with a 30 round magazine it is 6 well placed shots out of 30. See my point?

I think we got "lucky" in Aurora because the dope decided to use super high capacity drum magazines. Those are very prone to failure. I think the reports say this guy used 30 round magazines.

[Painkiller]

So you have an assault rifle because you think you need to protect yourself from the gov't?

Nice spin, but you know damn well that's not what I said. You read what you wanted to read.