18 Children Among 26 Dead in Conn Elementary School Shooting

I wish it was so... But since we both know that no such legislation has been introduced....I'm still waiting....

I've heard a helluva lot more bat-guano-crazy ideas from the teabaggers... (Thank god) that doesn't mean they'll become laws....

You are not going to have long to wait - the 113th Congress starts January 3rd and Senator Feinstein has promised to introduce "assault weapon" (whatever the heck that is) ban legislation on the very first day.

Badger

BadgerKustoms wrote:

Badger

How come few, if any, reference the University of Texas?

ZHawke wrote: How come few, if any, reference the University of Texas?

Nice attempt to return the volley, seriously think about Kent State and the validity of gun laws here.






Badger

Since Kent State is a prime example of right-wing governmental fascism run amok, I'm surprised that would posted by the gun-nuts.

Is the implication that somehow if the unarmed students had been armed with better weapons and firepower, they could have fired back at the National Guard and started a war on the campus? Hmmm, I wonder what the government would have done next? When the smoke cleared, I wonder how many dead there would have been on both sides?...I wonder who ultimately would have won?.... (No, actually, I don't "wonder"...I KNOW which side would have won... The same side that will win if the NRA-types think they're seriously going to take on the government with their little stashes of AR's, ammo and mini-meals...)

And how about that University of Texas shooter?... Nice sidestep, but you didn't answer the question, did you....

BadgerKustoms wrote:

ZHawke wrote: How come few, if any, reference the University of Texas?

Nice attempt to return the volley, seriously think about Kent State and the validity of gun laws here.






Badger

I did then, and I do now. I happened to be in Boot Camp at Great Lakes, IL at the time Kent State went down. As the RPOC of my company, it was my responsibility to ensure the men in my company were ready to respond if the protests at Kent State fostered some sort of protest outside our gates. To have "boots" be given live ammo for their ancient pieces they were required to carry with them all over the base was a precedent unseen and unheard of prior to that tragedy. Quite frankly, my Company Commander (an E-8 CPO) was appalled by this "order". We complied with it, but it made everyone more nervous and jumpy. Some might even go so far as to say it was a miracle of sorts someone in the ranks didn't go off.

The reason I brought UT into the equation is because a sniper rifle was apparently used in that tragedy. In fact, if one were to look at the "list" of violent acts against schools, I believe we might be even more appalled than we let on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States
It isn't a "new" phenomenon, by any stretch. But the numbers, both in frequency and in fatalities and injuries, is on the increase.

That does not mean one is actually "worse" than another. They're all tragic and affect those involved for their lifetimes. We just need to set aside our extreme differences on these issues and try to meet somewhere in the middle, in my opinion.

LadyJazzer wrote: Since Kent State is a prime example of right-wing governmental fascism run amok, I'm surprised that would posted by the gun-nuts. ....

LJ, if you're somehow under the impression I'm considered "right-wing", you've already lost most any arguement/disagreement you'd ever likely have with me. I may not be "left", can't say I'm "right" but never been one to stand on a fence either. Welcome to the simple fact that there ARE in fact 3 sides to every story. And while some of my methods of thought may be considered radically different from a norm, there are actually quite a few in this little boat. So just be aware of your opposition, unless you prefer to appear a fool.

LadyJazzer wrote: Is the implication that somehow if the unarmed students had been armed with better weapons and firepower, they could have fired back at the National Guard and started a war on the campus? Hmmm, I wonder what the government would have done next? When the smoke cleared, I wonder how many dead there would have been on both sides?...I wonder who ultimately would have won?.... (No, actually, I don't "wonder"...I KNOW which side would have won... The same side that will win if the NRA-types think they're seriously going to take on the government with their little stashes of AR's, ammo and mini-meals...)

The students being armed may or may not have made a difference. It could be argued either way that perhaps the NG would simply made a visual presense at what is described as a peaceful demonstration.... perhaps things would have gone as you illustrate here. I can honestly answer one of your statements however with complete accuracy.

LadyJazzer wrote: The same side that will win if the NRA-types think they're seriously going to take on the government with their little stashes of AR's, ammo and mini-meals.

I can honestly say I'd rather die fighting than do nothing at all, such is my religious beliefs as is personal one. And for the record, I'm NOT an NRA member either. Again, learning the opposition saves one from seeming foolish.

LadyJazzer wrote: And how about that University of Texas shooter?... Nice sidestep, but you didn't answer the question, did you....

Sometimes a side step is necessary, was I supposed to answer the question without having mine answered first? I've accepted your response to the Kent State issue, and in return my thoughts on the Texas shooter:

Like many of these other situations we seem to have 1 individual commit an act of horrible violence against others. (I dare not use the term "mankind" anymore as it denotes a "similarity" of sorts which can easily be disputed by simply reviewing the writings in this very thread.) You'll notice I didn't state that a rifle, killed 14 people and wounded 32 others.... but that an individual commited this act with the use there of...

The problem is clear, the problem is people. Because we can go back and forth all day long citing massacres involving firearms, bombs, toxins, etc., the world over and the simple fact remains that it is a problem with people, the tools and methods are merely secondary.


Badger

ZHawke wrote: It isn't a "new" phenomenon, by any stretch. But the numbers, both in frequency and in fatalities and injuries, is on the increase.

While I don't have numbers sitting right here in front of me, I'd suspect some truth to this statement. But ironically population the world over has also increased quite substantially and as I've hinted above:

BadgerKustoms wrote: (I dare not use the term "mankind" anymore as it denotes a "similarity" of sorts which can easily be disputed by simply reviewing the writings in this very thread.)

People can be so different in mental design that disagreements occur, biases are formed, sometimes even prejudices and such and its a sad result that sometimes violence is a result of such things.

Again, the problem is people.




Badger

BadgerKustoms wrote:

ZHawke wrote: It isn't a "new" phenomenon, by any stretch. But the numbers, both in frequency and in fatalities and injuries, is on the increase.

While I don't have numbers sitting right here in front of me, I'd suspect some truth to this statement. But ironically population the world over has also increased quite substantially and as I've hinted above:

BadgerKustoms wrote: (I dare not use the term "mankind" anymore as it denotes a "similarity" of sorts which can easily be disputed by simply reviewing the writings in this very thread.)

People can be so different in mental design that disagreements occur, biases are formed, sometimes even prejudices and such and its a sad result that sometimes violence is a result of such things.

Again, the problem is people.




Badger

Agree, in principle. So has technology (improved, at least). That being said, what makes these tragedies so horrific, in my opinion, is the type of instrument(s) being used. It seems to be morphing. People are, in point of fact, the problem. That being said, what do we do together to address the issue of gun violence in our nation that doesn't infringe on the rights so many on the pro-gun side of the fence seem so intent on protecting and preserving, while also don't infringe on the rights of children to go to school without having them, and their parents, be afraid for their safety. Again, I'm going to offer our website as a possible resource in trying to help advocate for safer schools. It's not a panacea. It doesn't presume there is a "be all, end all" solution to this problem. There is no "one size fits all" answer. One dimensional approaches to very complex issues don't very often work, if at all, in my opinion. That's why we advocate working together toward a common goal of helping to provide for safer schools.
http://www.thepeacechallenge.org