perdidochas

F Scouter, The Supreme Court (McDonald vs. Chicago, and Heller vs. DC) ruled that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, not just a right for states to have militia.

Moose, I stated a use for semi-auto assault type rifles that comes from history. I don't know how old you are, but I vividly remember the LA riots of 1992. Korean shopkeepers used AR15s (the pre-ban version, that was banned from sale by the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994) to protect their lives and livelihoods. Yes, they had 30 rd clips. No, they didn't have to shoot a lot of people, but the appearance and knowledge of the guns held the mobs off. Also, if massacres are the only reason for these guns, why did most of the police responders to Sandy Hook have them? It's a two-edged sword. Any gun that can be used for self defense (and most hunting guns) can also be used for massacres. The characteristics that make them useful for defense also make them useful for offense. On regulation, the problem with them is that there are so many of them that they are becoming useless and almost to the point of paralyzing us. Part of the reason that small businesses can't make it, is that they can't adapt to the regulations like bigger businesses. Wal-Mart has mastered regulations as has Applebees. Mom and Pop's hardware and Joe's Diner not so much.

Moose, The right to keep and bear arms would exist even if hunting were made illegal. Fundamentally, it is the right of self defense. Korean shopkeepers during the LA riots felt that the AR15s they had were needed. It kept them from being killed and having their lives destroyed by mobs. The problem is that anything that is effective to use in self defense is also usable in attacks. That is why it is futile to try to ban guns. Banning guns also bans methods to use for self defense. I'm a 250 lb overweight (underheight?) man in the suburbs. I can't take on a typical 18 yr old man in a hand to hand fight. Thankfully, I am allowed to own guns, which does give me a chance. Yes, I could use my guns to commit crime. That is the other side of them. The vast majority of gun owners don't use them for crime or for shooting up schools. Why punish us for the acts of a madman? Why not focus this on what is the most humane thing to focus on? The treatment of the mentally ill needs to be increased. Maybe if we can help those like the Sandy Hook Killer or the Columbine boys get the correct treatment, then we can stop these things. It will also help those mentally ill that are currently wandering the streets. While the mental institutions of old may not have been the ideal place for them, it was certainly better than what they are living in now. Finally, on the issue of technology vs. rights, if you think guns should be limited to 18th century technology, I guess you also think it would be ok to limit religion to those religions that existed at that time, and that freedom of press should only apply to hand-operated printed presses, and that the freedom of speech should similarly only apply to actual speech (no microphones or broadcasts of any kind, much less internet forums). It is silly. The muskets were state of the art personal weapons. We should be able to own the same.

All guns in use today were once (or are now) suitable for military use or are adapted from military firearms. That bolt action deer rifle is a direct descendent of the Mauser rifle used by the German Army from the turn of the 20th century to 1944. More and more people are using AR style guns for hunting. AR style guns in the configuration used by most of the crazed gunmen, from what I've read, are just about ideal for hunting coyotes. In a slightly more powerful caliber, they are suitable for deer hunting. Korean shopkeepers in LA during the post Rodney King riots used AR15s to defend themselves and their families against mobs that were seeking to burn down their stores (houses). The appearance of the AR15s stopped the mobs from attacking, without much need to actually shoot anybody by the shopkeepers. The 30 rd magazines allowed those shopkeepers to fire warning shots into the air (which they wouldn't have done with 5 or 10 rd magazines). Guns aren't the problem. Evil (and sick) people are.

The UK had lower murder rates than the U.S. before they passed gun control. Our murder rate has gone down by close to half since the early 1990s. (from 9.8 murders per 100,000 population in 1991 to 4.7 murders per 100,000 population in 2011).

Bushmaster low cost? Hardly. I couldn't find a new one for less than $700 in my searchings on the internet. MSRP for the cheapest on the Bushmaster website was $850. Bushmaster is one of the more successful of the AR manufacturers, and IIRC, I read they were the number one selling AR. That is probably why they are involved in more of these shootings.

Beav, As I said, several of these SROs (School Resource Officers) are friends of mine. They don't get involved with discipline, unless it's something that would be a crime outside of the schools (i.e. sexual assault, assault and battery, etc.) Their purpose is not to enforce school rules, but to get info about crime in the community, and partly to show another side of policemen, so that possibly the school aged generation will not just see policemen as enemies. Basement, Most of the people I know with CCW permits are the type of person that wear belts with suspenders, always wear their life jacket, and who have a complete emergency kit (with road flares, and cones). I'm not a CCW permit holder, because the utility I would get from the permit don't match the investment of $200 or so in combined licensing/fingerprinting/course fees. Then again, I don't have road flares either.

All of the theaters (by theater, meaning multiplex) mentioned were showing Batman.

The only people that are at all inconvenienced or stopped by gun control regulations are the law-abiding. Mexico has very stringent gun control laws. It doesn't even slow down the narco-traffickers from being armed. The problem that seems to be concerning most people these days re: guns is the crazed gunman. That is a mental health issue, not a crime issue. The problem is that, due to civil liberties and economics reasons, we have decided that mentally ill people should be in the community as much as possible. This is why we have the homeless people mumbling to themselves, and why it is so hard to commit very ill people into mental hospitals.

Out of prison after only 17 yrs for killing his grandmother with a hammer? Sounds like a criminal justice problem, and probably a mental health problem. He wasn't legally allowed to own those guns.

Basement, Maybe they put the unfit officers in schools in your county. My county does almost the opposite. They choose among the most likable officers. Why? The sheriff's department provides the officers to the schools primarily to gather information about crime. Their job is to make contact with the students, and secondarily to protect the schools. I'm friends with several such officers, and I am glad to have such fine men in the schools.

So Momleader, Most high and middle schools in my district have armed security guards (well, sheriff's deputies with guns). Malls and movie theaters aren't major targets unless they are posted "no guns." (Batman shooter chose the only theater within 20 minutes of his apt that didn't allow guns, there were bigger and closer theaters). As a police officer told me when we talked gun control about 15 yrs ago. He was all for citizens to be armed. In a similar response to the NRA's, he thought having more armed good guys was a good thing. Bad guys will always be armed.

Merlyn, Do you truly think "The night before Christmas" is religious? All, From a school law class I took about 13 yrs ago, we learned that schools can do whatever their community accepts. There is no hard and fast rule, and basically, complaints guide the rules in a community. In my community, skeptic would have no problem wearing a Santa hat (my wife a school administrator wore one on "hat day" last week), and reading that particular poem. In his, obviously, it's not acceptable.

Calico, Is it law enforcement officers or politicians asking for certain guns to be banned?

WasE61, A study done in Florida of CCW permit holders showed that they committed less crime per capita with guns than did police officers. There is no need to worry about CCW permit holders with guns. Most are overly cautious, stable individuals.

Connecticut has an assault weapon ban. The gun in question was legal according to that ban.

As Hurricane Sandy (and other Hurricanes before that) tells us, the possibility that you can be without electricity and phone service (even cell) is pretty good. I know I lived through the aftermath of Hurricane Ivan. Our community (neighborhood) did talk to each other about defense against looters from outside of the neighborhood. Now had we done that beforehand? No. But the fact that we had guns, gave us that option after the storm. I don't really buy that most gun owners think that they need guns to protect themselves from their own communities. We are protecting ourselves from people that our outside of our communities, i.e. the less than law-abiding.

Basement, Following the technology argument, do you think the Founders would have expected the internet, TV and Radio? How about Scientology or the LDS? Should all of those new-fangled things not have the relevant amendment applied? After all, the Founders may not have anticipated them?

Responsible firearms owners are doing a pretty good job of keeping their guns secure from children. The rate of accidental firearm deaths of children is pretty low (about .08 per 100,000 children). This is lower than it was in the 1970s. The murder rate with guns is also down. It has been going down since the late 1990s. This is despite the fact that the number of guns is at a record high.

If we go off the fiscal cliff, the ones that will suffer the most are those in the lower income levels. When the Bush tax cuts were first made, I remember how much they helped my under $25k income for a family of four.

I don't believe that increased access to full auto weapons would make things any safer in terms of crimes and madmen. I also don't think it would make things less safe in terms of crimes and madmen. Very strict gun laws did nothing to prevent madmen shooting up schools in Germany in the 2000s.

WasE61, It depends on your definition of assault weapon. Using the strict definition, assault weapons have never been legal for widespread use in the U.S. (The strict definition is that they are selective fire (meaning that they can either be full or semi-auto, depending on shooter choice) weapons chambered for an intermediate round). Those have been for the most part illegal since before assault weapons were invented during WWII. You are correct that the assault weapons ban, just banned the sale of certain weapons with certain features. The "ban" was so easy to get around because the law was nonsensical, as the features were merely cosmetic (but that's the problem with gun laws written by people ignorant of technical knowledge of guns).

I don't, but I do carry a knife, a first aid kit, and some basic survival items. Same mentality, IMHO. Being prepared. As I said, I don't carry a gun, but I don't think that those who do are paranoid. They just are a bit more concerned about the violent potential of their fellow man than I am. I probably should be more concerned, as my father is a retired forensic psychiatrist (i.e. he treated the criminally insane), and should know better.

I don't buy the arguments that guns=safe society, so no, I don't think that RPGs would make things safer. I also don't think that RPGs would cause many problems. I think current gun laws are reasonable. I really don't think we need any more. I think a more important thing is that conviction of using a gun to commit a crime should result in draconian penalties. I don't think that any laws will stop crazy rampages. In the 2000s, Germany (which has extremely strict gun laws and little or no gun culture) had more of a problem with school shootings per capita than we did.

Carrying a first aid kit is paranoid?