Gun ownership poll

[jingram058]

After continuing to periodically check in on this thread, the consensus would seem to be that nothing whatsoever can be done to stop or even decrease the number of mass shootings in this country because of the 2nd Amendment. These events are just something that cannot be eliminated.

[clydepepper]

Lessons in Addiction & Adaptability:

280576168_9740647055975885_1842533570762868570_n.jpgTP.jpg

[G1911]

Can we please enforce the rule against hijacking? He’s done it twice now after mod post 294 warning specifically against it.

There is much disagreement but it has been mostly civil (the posts about firearms, the actual subject, have been entirely civil) . I don’t think hijacking any thread anyone doesn’t like is appropriate. Nothing would stay on topic.

[cannonballsun]

[QUOTE=clydepepper;2232979]Lessons in Addiction & Adaptability:



That cat picture is absolutely hilarious.

[irv]

Originally Posted by jingram058

After continuing to periodically check in on this thread, the consensus would seem to be that nothing whatsoever can be done to stop or even decrease the number of mass shootings in this country because of the 2nd Amendment. These events are just something that cannot be eliminated.

Copycat crimes are a well known thing. The more attention these types of tragedies are given, the more they are likely to happen again.

I know a few that work for CN & CP rail up here in Canada, and I have been told more than once that when they report derailments, many a time they are intentional but they don't make that tidbit public knowledge because they know the next time the perp(s) will try and outdo the previous one.

[bnorth]

It is a mental health issue that many try to make a gun issue.

It is NOT the gun it is the moron behind the gun that is the problem. We had a Russian exchange student go crazy here with a sword and killed several people. Not a single person wanted to ban swords afterwards.

[cannonballsun]

In that mass shooting in Dayton, the shooter opened fire in a very popular area of town that had a large police presence. The police shot and killed the shooter within 30 seconds of opening fire. In that 30 seconds, he had already killed 9 people.
Good guys with guns can only do so much.

[cannonballsun]

The police said he fired 42 shots in 30 seconds, killing 9 and injuring 27.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by cannonballsun

Good guys with guns can only do so much.

Good guys with guns is how these things always, finally, end. Solution: Let's have more good guys with guns. Let's have the bad guys out-armed 1000 to one.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Good guys with guns is how these things always, finally, end. Solution: Let's have more good guys with guns. Let's have the bad guys out-armed 1000 to one.

This.

These shootings are incredibly rare, but if one happened around you (the colloquial you, not any specific person) wouldn’t you want the other innocents nearby to be armed and able to effectively fight back? The quicker a good guy with a gun takes down the psycho, the less bloodshed there is. You’re more likely to live if others are armed too, than if only the criminals have them. There’s a reason these things tend to happen, in the very rare cases that they do, in crowds of unarmed people and in places where people are less likely to be armed. Nobody stages a massacre at a sportsman’s club.

[cannonballsun]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Good guys with guns is how these things always, finally, end. Solution: Let's have more good guys with guns. Let's have the bad guys out-armed 1000 to one.

In that scenario, how many of the 1000 good guys will accidentally shoot another good guy ? There'd be bullets flying all over the place. Doesn't sound too good to me.
Cops already worry about dealing with armed good guys at a live shooter scene. You've got a gun, how do the cops know you're a good guy ?
Anyway, the cops shot and killed the shooter in Dayton in 30 seconds. 9 people were already dead.
In Buffalo, at the grocery store, there was a good guy with a gun on the scene. He was a retired ex-cop. He was out gunned and killed.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by cannonballsun

In that scenario, how many of the 1000 good guys will accidentally shoot another good guy ? There'd be bullets flying all over the place. Doesn't sound too good to me.
Cops already worry about dealing with armed good guys at a live shooter scene. You've got a gun, how do the cops know you're a good guy ?
Anyway, the cops shot and killed the shooter in Dayton in 30 seconds. 9 people were already dead.
In Buffalo, at the grocery store, there was a good guy with a gun on the scene. He was a retired ex-cop. He was out gunned and killed.

Agreed. More guns is not the solution that makes sense to me. I realize it does for others.

No one ever makes the point that guns do the killing so I don’t know why the argument is always repeated that it’s the person behind the gun that is the real problem. I think everyone understands that and wishes we could cure all deranged individuals. Since we probably can’t, it’s just that if it were harder to get a gun that could do so much rapid shooting or harder to get a gun at all, maybe we’d have a few more stabbings on our hands as opposed to mass shootings.

On the second amendment, similar to the first amendment, the freedom is always subject to reasonable restrictions. We have freedom of speech, but we can’t shout fire in a crowded theater. We have the right to bear arms, but we can’t walk around with bazookas.

[G1911]

This loops back to an earlier main point. If we know it is the person, not the tool, what legislation on the tool are we proposing that is not taking peoples guns or banning guns that will reduce homicides and shootings?

Is there a compromise proposition that could be reached?