OT: Colorado shooting

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Babe3Ruth3

There will be time later to debate about gun control, but lets use this post only to pray for the victims and their family's at this very difficult time.

+1, sorry you are correct

[barrysloate]

I fully believe that every responsible American has the right to own a gun. I think even most people on the left agree with this.

But not an assault weapon. Not a weapon that shoots off fifty bullets in a minute. What possible reason could any private citizen need one of those? I understand there is a black market for pretty much everything. But Mr. Holmes walked into a gun shop and bought it legally. Why was it available to him, or anyone else? Maybe a soldier would need one, maybe a police officer. But not a private citizen.

[barrysloate]

I know Peter, the NRA is always depicted as too powerful to take on. Excuse me for being naive, but why? What are they going to do if you take them on?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I know Peter, the NRA is always depicted as too powerful to take on. Excuse me for being naive, but why? What are they going to do if you take them on?

Led by Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, who was paid $1.26 million in 2008, the NRA in the past two decades has spent more than $100 million on political activities in the United States, according to documents and interviews, including $22 million on lobbying and nearly $75 million on campaigns.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Led by Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, who was paid $1.26 million in 2008, the NRA in the past two decades has spent more than $100 million on political activities in the United States, according to documents and interviews, including $22 million on lobbying and nearly $75 million on campaigns.

That's all fine Peter, but why doesn't anyone in a position of power have the balls to challenge them?

[carrigansghost]

NRA vs. AARP. No politician would take either side.

Rawn

[barrysloate]

Politicians won't take on rent control or rent stabilization either...what's with these wusses?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

That's all fine Peter, but why doesn't anyone in a position of power have the balls to challenge them?

Of course not, it's all about getting elected, but you knew that.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Of course not, it's all about getting elected, but you knew that.

How about after they get elected? How about if you're serving your second and last term and can't get elected any more?

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

That's all fine Peter, but why doesn't anyone in a position of power have the balls to challenge them?

Because sadly most of the people in power are focused on one thing, staying in power. I have become convinced that those on both sides believe in one thing, whatever it takes to be elected. The age of the statesman and civil servant has passed.

[SetBuilder]

Here's the problem with gun control in this case: the shooter probably looked very sane to an objective observer. He was a Ph.D student and probably looked like a good guy. Unless we invent mind reading devices or administer psych exams to gun purchasers, I'm not sure how "gun control" is going to help things.

And don't say "ban guns altogether", that's never going to happen.

[nolemmings]

I agree that in this situation gun control may have limited relevance or impact, although that doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it. I also agree that the topic of mental illness should take on renewed discussion and importance, although many of the same people who say our abilities to diagnose and treat mental illness need to improve will also refuse to pay one red cent to fund programs for such purposes (unless maybe if we also grant additional tax breaks for the mythical job creators).

[Matthew H]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I agree that in this situation gun control may have limited relevance or impact, although that doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it. I also agree that the topic of mental illness should take on renewed discussion and importance, although many of the same people who say our abilities to diagnose and treat mental illness need to improve will also refuse to pay one red cent to fund programs for such purposes (unless of course we also grant additional tax breaks for the mythical job creators).

I agree, I just don't understand how there can be so much funding, charity, awareness, etc. for something like an STD yet there is generally no common knowledge or awareness among the American people on the subject of mental illness.

[Runscott]

edited - wasted my keystrokes

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Here's the problem with gun control in this case: the shooter probably looked very sane to an objective observer. He was a Ph.D student and probably looked like a good guy. Unless we invent mind reading devices or administer psych exams to gun purchasers, I'm not sure how "gun control" is going to help things.

And don't say "ban guns altogether", that's never going to happen.

And the gun shop owner therefore concluded he was buying an assault rifle for a legitimate purpose?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And the gun shop owner therefore concluded he was buying an assault rifle for a legitimate purpose?

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And the gun shop owner therefore concluded he was buying an assault rifle for a legitimate purpose?

I'm not sure why there is so much emphasis on the assault rifle. Take that out of the equation for just a minute. He still had 3 other guns with him - 2 Glock .40s and a Remington 870 Pump shotgun.

I, too, own a Glock similiar to the one he used, except mine is 9mm. The gun came with 2 clips, I purchased 2 additional clips. Each clip holds 10 rounds. I can discharge all 4 clips (40 rounds) in about a minute. It takes literally 2 seconds to drop the empty clip and replace it with a full clip.

My point is this. He didn't need the assault weapon to carry out the carnage that he did. Heck, he didn't even need the shotgun or the other Glock. He could have done as much damage with just one Glock as he did with all 4 guns.

Let's say for a minute that assualt weapons were illegal to purchase and he couldn't have purchased one. Do you really think that would have stopped him from doing this? Do you really think he couldn't have done the same amount of damage with 1 handgun and multiple loaded clips?

Let's quit focusing on the way he did it and focus on why he did it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Perhaps his interest in buying an assault weapon might have clued someone in that something was not right. But let's not impinge on individual freedom, this is the US of A.

[Matthew H]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Here's the problem with gun control in this case: the shooter probably looked very sane to an objective observer. He was a Ph.D student and probably looked like a good guy. Unless we invent mind reading devices or administer psych exams to gun purchasers, I'm not sure how "gun control" is going to help things.

And don't say "ban guns altogether", that's never going to happen.

I seriously doubt that the guy buying assault rifles for the purpose to commit mass murder looked perfectly sane. At least not to someone who knows what to look for...

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by Matthew H

I seriously doubt that the guy buying assault rifles for the purpose to commit mass murder looked perfectly sane. At least not to someone who knows what to look for...

The 2nd ammendment doesn't allow you to judge the mental capacity of someone purchasing a rifle that meets all of the consitutional background check requirements to bear arms (no felonies, etc). Gun dealers aren't psychologists.

AR-15 and AK-47 rifles are sometimes used to hunt game. Why? Because there are plenty of military enthusiasts out there who enjoy firing the military style rifles. Just like baseball cards have historical appeal, the AK-47 rifle has a long documented history and there is a segment of the population who enjoys this sort of thing.

Now if you're advocating the ban of all military style rifles to anyone except police and military personnel, then I suppose it would have been much harder (or impossible) for the madman to purchase a weapon of this caliber. Right now that hasn't happened.