Fukshot wrote:I can see some good coming from making PP transfers all go through an FFL.

I agree on this wholeheartedly, Fukshot.

The private party non-registered firearms transfer loophole should be closed. In fact, if we can make it mandatory that FFL holders do the background check and registrations paperwork FOR FREE, there should be no qualms about such registrations with the public. The Seller and Buyer would both sleep better at night knowing everything was legit.

After all, some Gun Stores do that right now and readily find that it is a good way to get foot traffic from known potential customers through their doors. It's good 'ol fashion Customer Service.

I know this regulation change wouldn't directly apply to prevent madmen shootings such as this, unfortunately.

The attacks at Clackamas Town Center and Sandy Hook Elementary are extraordinary events. Public policy based on extreme events is nearly always made in haste and from emotional reaction, not deliberate, rational consideration. It is therefore bad public policy.

As someone who is a liberal gun owner and supports 2A rights, but also has a diagnosis of Asperger's syndrome, I though I should repost this press release from the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, dated yesterday, as a helpful PSA:

ASAN Statement on Media Reports Regarding Newtown, CT Shooting
December 14, 2012

In response to recent media reports that the perpetrator of today’s shooting in Newtown, Connecticut may have been diagnosed on the autism spectrum or with a psychiatric disability, the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) issued the following statement today:

“Our hearts go out to the victims of today’s shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut and their families. Recent media reports have suggested that the perpetrator of this violence, Adam Lanza, may have been diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome, a diagnosis on the autism spectrum, or with another psychiatric disability. In either event, it is imperative that as we mourn the victims of this horrific tragedy that commentators and the media avoid drawing inappropriate and unfounded links between autism or other disabilities and violence. Autistic Americans and individuals with other disabilities are no more likely to commit violent crime than non-disabled people. In fact, people with disabilities of all kinds, including autism, are vastly more likely to be the victims of violent crime than the perpetrators. Should the shooter in today’s shooting prove to in fact be diagnosed on the autism spectrum or with another disability, the millions of Americans with disabilities should be no more implicated in his actions than the non-disabled population is responsible for those of non-disabled shooters.

Today’s violence was the act of an individual. We urge media, government and community leaders to speak out against any effort to spuriously link the Autistic or broader disability community with violent crime. Autistic Americans and other groups of people with disabilities persist in facing discrimination and segregation in school, the workplace and the general community. In this terrible time, our society should not further stigmatize our community. As our great nation has so many times in the past, let us come together to both mourn those killed by acts of heinous murder and defend all parts of our country from the scourge of stigma and prejudice.”

Media inquiries regarding this shooting may be directed to ASAN at info@autisticadvocacy.org.

SwampGrouch wrote:The attacks at Clackamas Town Center and Sandy Hook Elementary are extraordinary events. Public policy based on extreme events is nearly always made in haste and from emotional reaction, not deliberate, rational consideration. It is therefore bad public policy.

I couldn't have said it better.

SwampGrouch wrote:The attacks at Clackamas Town Center and Sandy Hook Elementary are extraordinary events. Public policy based on extreme events is nearly always made in haste and from emotional reaction, not deliberate, rational consideration. It is therefore bad public policy.

Quoted straight from an NRA news release?

We have had ample time to consider gun policy. Many of us are just restating our stance given the recent events.

(We have) a very inadequate, inferior mental health system....there is not much help society gives a family or law enforcement or doctors who deal with mentally disturbed individuals.

Tom Fuentes, former Assistant FBI Director and current paid CNN 'Contributor'


This is a partial response Fuentes had to a question regarding guns in relation to yesterday's horror.

That one is a responsible gun owner is nothing to be ashamed of, as much as the anti gun movement would like to paint otherwise. That one is an irresponsible gun owner is very much something to be ashamed of...

Both yesterday's horror and the shooting in Portland last Tuesday look more to be the result of what the quote above references rather than a circumstance of irresponsible gun ownership...though the question of how the gun used in Tuesday's shooting was stored remains to be answered.

SwampGrouch wrote:The attacks at Clackamas Town Center and Sandy Hook Elementary are extraordinary events. Public policy based on extreme events is nearly always made in haste and from emotional reaction, not deliberate, rational consideration. It is therefore bad public policy.

Took the words outta my mouth SwampGrouch. I'm reminded of the gun control laws of '68 and '89, and '94...

Thanks,

Xela

SwampGrouch wrote:The attacks at Clackamas Town Center and Sandy Hook Elementary are extraordinary events. Public policy based on extreme events is nearly always made in haste and from emotional reaction, not deliberate, rational consideration. It is therefore bad public policy.

One of the best and most concise statements on this thread.

rolandson wrote:

(We have) a very inadequate, inferior mental health system....there is not much help society gives a family or law enforcement or doctors who deal with mentally disturbed individuals.

Tom Fuentes, former Assistant FBI Director and current paid CNN 'Contributor'


This is a partial response Fuentes had to a question regarding guns in relation to yesterday's horror.

That one is a responsible gun owner is nothing to be ashamed of, as much as the anti gun movement would like to paint otherwise. That one is an irresponsible gun owner is very much something to be ashamed of...

Both yesterday's horror and the shooting in Portland last Tuesday look more to be the result of what the quote above references rather than a circumstance of irresponsible gun ownership...though the question of how the gun used in Tuesday's shooting was stored remains to be answered.

So the question stands. How do we limit access to guns by the irresponsible and mentally disturbed? What is 'mentally disturbed' (is being a Liberal a sign of mental issues?)

This is a serious public safety issue. Every day and a half the same number of people are killed in America by guns as in yesterday's massacre. It is not an isolated incident, it is a continuous and severe problem, just distributed in small numbers and hence largely unnoticed and unaddressed, But it is there, and it can no longer be ignored.

Awake wrote: So the question stands. How do we limit access to guns by the irresponsible and mentally disturbed? What is 'mentally disturbed' (is being a Liberal a sign of mental issues?)

we can start by locking our guns up...

rolandson wrote:

Awake wrote: So the question stands. How do we limit access to guns by the irresponsible and mentally disturbed? What is 'mentally disturbed' (is being a Liberal a sign of mental issues?)

we can start by locking our guns up...

Yeah that is a start to try to keep little girls from being shot in the face by gun owners that are 'irresponsible gun owners'.

(Yes I am one pissed off MOFO right now)

you are aware that neither of the perpetrators of these most recent incidents actually owned the guns that they used...yes?

rolandson wrote:you are aware that neither of the perpetrators of these most recent incidents actually owned the guns that they used...yes?

Yeah, so what's your point? They still got their hands on guns and perpetrated mass shootings. It emphasizes the issue even more... gun regulations as used today are NOT working.

I have been following this thread, but have not yet commented. Actually, I have started a couple of replies, but trashed them, because it has been said already, or my thinking is still too fluid.

But I do want to thank everyone for this thoughtful and considerate discussion. You know where else you can go for a thoughtful and nuanced discussion after an event like this?

Nowhere, that's where.

The urge to "do something" immediately is understandably strong. But regulation of magazine capacity is, in my opinion, arbitrary and ineffective. Yeah, I'm aware of at least one incident where the shooter was tackled between reloads. These are (regardless of what the media circus suggests) still very rare and traumatic events and as SG mentioned, public policy should not be based on emotional reactions. If I thought it would help, I'd support it, but as anyone who is involved in competitive shooting or has taken serious defensive handgun courses knows, the problem of vulnerability between reloads is easily mitigated. With relatively little practice, anyone can learn to reload a semi-auto handgun in no more than a couple of seconds. Yes, it may make a difference in rare cases. But so is doubling the trigger weight, or making all handguns single action, or removing the sights. But not enough to consider it a good return on investment. A "get safe quick" scheme and political misdirection.

Additionally, I'm disgusted by how many politicians are treating this as an opportunity to earn emotional and political brownie points, partially enabled by the media-driven, disproportionately hysterical public response to this tragedy.

I don't mean to trivialize this traumatic incident but how about a sense of perspective? According to UNICEF, approximately 19,000 children under the age of 5 will die today, globally. 5,000 per day in a handful of African countries alone. Approximately 13,000 of these deaths are easily preventable. If we're talking about things like a little clean drinking water, food or an anti-diarrhea pill. This is not counting the tens of thousands of children over the age of 5 killed and exploited every day in poor countries. Where are the tearful protests in front of the White House for them, or maudlin speeches about this "unimaginable horror"? Are they less important because they die in a remote African village and not in an affluent Connecticut suburb? Do we identify less with their parents because things like that are "supposed" to happen there? Affluent societies like ours let it happen, and these problems are a hell of a lot easier to "fix" than a random school shooting. Donate a few dollars.

If this society really wants to discuss "evil", then it should be intellectually honest about it.

I apologize for the rant. Apparently, I need to watch less CNN today.

Awake wrote:

rolandson wrote:you are aware that neither of the perpetrators of these most recent incidents actually owned the guns that they used...yes?

Yeah, so what's your point? They still got their hands on guns and perpetrated mass shootings. It emphasizes the issue even more... gun regulations as used today are NOT working.

The point is a simple one. We don't know yet whether these acts were the result of careful planning and preparation or acts of rage abetted by an opportunity of easy access to guns that may not have been secured well.

In truth we don't yet know how any of the guns used this past week were stored. We only know that none of the guns used belonged to the people who used them. It isn't a case of a failed regulatory environment, it's a case of a nonexistent mental healthcare system. I am suggesting that as far as these two despicable persons are concerned, they did not come by the weapons used legally.

It has been pointed out that nothing exists that could have prevented these persons from using some other means to accomplish what they set out to do. I am suggesting that well secured guns do not provide the opportunity for impulse.

Awake wrote:

SwampGrouch wrote:The attacks at Clackamas Town Center and Sandy Hook Elementary are extraordinary events. Public policy based on extreme events is nearly always made in haste and from emotional reaction, not deliberate, rational consideration. It is therefore bad public policy.

Quoted straight from an NRA news release?

In a word, no. Created at the keyboard of the SwampGrouch.

If the NRA as said something similar, well, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. (But I still loath Cox and LaPierre.)

larrymod wrote: But I do want to thank everyone for this thoughtful and considerate discussion. You know where else you can go for a thoughtful and nuanced discussion after an event like this?

Nowhere, that's where.

Seconded. I have never been more proud to be a member of this forum.

Yesterday and today, none of my conversations about this shooting have failed to include mention of what the conversation about this event and gun politics is like in the pro and anti mainstreams, and contrasting those conversations with this one here.

Also, begamot, yeah.

Fukshot wrote:

larrymod wrote: But I do want to thank everyone for this thoughtful and considerate discussion. You know where else you can go for a thoughtful and nuanced discussion after an event like this?

Nowhere, that's where.

Seconded. I have never been more proud to be a member of this forum.

Yesterday and today, none of my conversations about this shooting have failed to include mention of what the conversation about this event and gun politics is like in the pro and anti mainstreams, and contrasting those conversations with this one here.

Also, begamot, yeah.

This. Somebody should put us in charge.

begemot wrote:The urge to "do something" immediately is understandably strong. But regulation of magazine capacity is, in my opinion, arbitrary and ineffective. Yeah, I'm aware of at least one incident where the shooter was tackled between reloads. These are (regardless of what the media circus suggests) still very rare and traumatic events and as SG mentioned, public policy should not be based on emotional reactions. If I thought it would help, I'd support it, but as anyone who is involved in competitive shooting or has taken serious defensive handgun courses knows, the problem of vulnerability between reloads is easily mitigated. With relatively little practice, anyone can learn to reload a semi-auto handgun in no more than a couple of seconds. Yes, it may make a difference in rare cases. But so is doubling the trigger weight, or making all handguns single action, or removing the sights. But not enough to consider it a good return on investment. A "get safe quick" scheme and political misdirection.

Additionally, I'm disgusted by how many politicians are treating this as an opportunity to earn emotional and political brownie points, partially enabled by the media-driven, disproportionately hysterical public response to this tragedy.

I don't mean to trivialize this traumatic incident but how about a sense of perspective? According to UNICEF, approximately 19,000 children under the age of 5 will die today, globally. 5,000 per day in a handful of African countries alone. Approximately 13,000 of these deaths are easily preventable. If we're talking about things like a little clean drinking water, food or an anti-diarrhea pill. This is not counting the tens of thousands of children over the age of 5 killed and exploited every day in poor countries. Where are the tearful protests in front of the White House for them, or maudlin speeches about this "unimaginable horror"? Are they less important because they die in a remote African village and not in an affluent Connecticut suburb? Do we identify less with their parents because things like that are "supposed" to happen there? Affluent societies like ours let it happen, and these problems are a hell of a lot easier to "fix" than a random school shooting. Donate a few dollars.

If this society really wants to discuss "evil", then it should be intellectually honest about it.

I apologize for the rant. Apparently, I need to watch less CNN today.

Rant on, brother. You're just saying what we're all saying, feeling, and thinking.

begemot wrote:The urge to "do something" immediately is understandably strong...
I apologize for the rant. Apparently, I need to watch less CNN today. :(

shit...

I was so caught up in what i was thinking that i didn't read what you had to say until just now...which has restored a bit of my perspective.

Perhaps we all need to watch a little less CNN...

Am I the only who is curious as to why the mom had all these guns in the first place? After reading a few articles about the woman she doesn't come across being a gun enthusiast. Perhaps more will come out in the future as to why she had them.

whitey wrote:Am I the only who is curious as to why the mom had all these guns in the first place? After reading a few articles about the woman she doesn't come across being a gun enthusiast. Perhaps more will come out in the future as to why she had them.

She's been described as some sort of gun enthusiast by various news outlets. Apparently she was concerned about a possible breakdown of society.

I'd advise caution before putting too much stock into that characterization just yet. They may be right. They may be wrong. There were initial reports of 2 shooters, that the killer had killed his father (the father is quite alive), that the mother worked at the school where the horror happened (now they say she did not), that someone buzzed the killer into the school (he forced his way in), they misidentified the shooter as his brother, etc.

From the last report I heard, she actually was a collector/enthusiast. She would take her two sons out target shooting. Just ABC news' newest info... Who really knows. I had first heard the Bushmaster was found unused in the car, now they are saying it was found next to his body. Remember, you cannot stop crazy.... If someone wants to kill, there are unlimited ways to do it... It is sad. The problem, IMO, isn't guns, but people.