Shooting in Connecticut

[Richie]

LOL he has no control over law making though. Its not like in Britain where Cameron can vote something through parliament. He hasnt a chance of getting anything like that through a republican majority Houses of Representatives. He couldnt even close Guantanamo Bay when he wanted to. They have the DOF of political systems

And even if he could, the Supreme Court would overrule him on grounds that such laws would violate the constitution.

 

[Jordinho]

And even if he could, the Supreme Court would overrule him on grounds that such laws would violate the constitution.

The Constitution also said slaves should count as three-fifths of a person.

 

[Superted]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people (with guns).

 

[Skinhead in a Suit]

LOL he has no control over law making though. Its not like in Britain where Cameron can vote something through parliament. He hasnt a chance of getting anything like that through a republican majority Houses of Representatives. He couldnt even close Guantanamo Bay when he wanted to. They have the DOF of political systems

But he can back the 2nd Amendment representatives into a corner where they can no longer feasibly justify their position and they have to accept that changes must be made. Similar to how he currently is over raising taxes for the top 2%.

And even if he could, the Supreme Court would overrule him on grounds that such laws would violate the constitution.

Then they should amend the Constitution. It will be really tough for any politician to justify the sale of automatic and semi-automatic weapons to any member of the public after this terrible tragedy.

 

[Rock Strongo]

Terrible news. How man can be so cruel I will never know. No excuse for such actions.

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Fapatalk 2

 

[Richie]

And lets be honest, strict gun laws didn't save the lives of 33 under 18s (77 people total) from Anders Breivik in Norway a couple years ago.

I'm all for gun control in this country, but guns are such an ingrained part of the US that it will never change. Just as prohibition didn't stop people drinking, banning guns won't stop people owning guns, it will just turn normally law abiding citizens in to criminals.

Guns are so numerous in the US even if you banned them outright tomorrow, criminals intent on hurting people could get a gun with very little trouble.

 

[Yiddo]

Will always happen all while any American citizen is allowed to own a gun. Did they really not think things like this would happen when the law was introduced? Even if it was years and years ago.

Im afraid there will be more and more situations like this in the near future.

A shame and my heart goes out to loved ones of those who were injured / murdered.

 

[papaspur]

And lets be honest, strict gun laws didn't save the lives of 33 under 18s (77 people total) from Anders Breivik in Norway a couple years ago.

I'm all for gun control in this country, but guns are such an ingrained part of the US that it will never change. Just as prohibition didn't stop people drinking, banning guns won't stop people owning guns, it will just turn normally law abiding citizens in to criminals.

Guns are so numerous in the US even if you banned them outright tomorrow, criminals intent on hurting people could get a gun with very little trouble.

This is pretty true, lots of Americans love their guns.

The logic of amending the constitution: Just because the government has tanks doesn't mean citizens should get them too. In the event of an uprising, I would hope that we could cause change in a peaceful manner.

But FFS, we need to have an adult discussion about this. It's too bad that one side refuses to listen to reason. I don't want to ban guns; I just want them to be more difficult to attain, with required background checks. Just like NJ has.

 

[Richie]

This is pretty true, lots of Americans love their guns.

The logic of amending the constitution: Just because the government has tanks doesn't mean citizens should get them too. In the event of an uprising, I would hope that we could cause change in a peaceful manner.

But FFS, we need to have an adult discussion about this. It's too bad that one side refuses to listen to reason. I don't want to ban guns; I just want them to be more difficult to attain, with required background checks. Just like NJ has.

I was reading comments on a San Antonio Spurs forum, aren't New Jersey and Connecticut two of the states with the strictest gun control laws? Surely that shows that even with such controls, these such incidents will continue to happen.

 

[Mulletperm]

I was reading comments on a San Antonio Spurs forum, aren't New Jersey and Connecticut two of the states with the strictest gun control laws? Surely that shows that even with such controls, these such incidents will continue to happen.

State-wide controls aren't going to be of any use, it has to be a nation-wide control. There has to be a stop to this and gun-control has to be the logical start?

 

[Richie]

State-wide controls aren't going to be of any use, it has to be a nation-wide control. There has to be a stop to this and gun-control has to be the logical start?

Obviously not if you want to outright ban guns, but Papaspur was referring to wanting background checks etc... which I think already take place in New Jersey and Connecticut which are the states involved in this incident.

What do you suggest as a 'nationwide control'?

 

[Skinhead in a Suit]

What do you suggest as a 'nationwide control'?

A ban on assault weapons would be a good start.

 

[Richie]

A ban on assault weapons would be a good start.

See heres the thing though, I don't see how that would make any difference to a situation like this. Details are sketchy but it sounds like the guy went in with 2 pistols and his assault rifle was found in the car.

A semi automatic isn't much worse than an automatic in a small space against defenceless individuals. You can fire up to 5 rounds/second with these semi automatic handguns, it might take a second or two longer but a guy walking in to a room with a gun, regardless of its classification, will kill everyone if he wants to. The guy could have had a 6 shot revolver, it would make no difference.

In a situation where there are more people and an open space I agree with the argument against assault weapons, but in a shooting like this it makes no difference.

 

[Skinhead in a Suit]

But what is the justification for anybody to own one of these weapons? It's not for hunting and, if we're being completely honest, it's not for home defence either. If the only reason left is to protect oneself from a person who has an assault weapon, then it's the chicken and egg argument. If you take away the egg, then the chicken becomes moot.

Maybe a change in the laws about these weapons also changes the public consciousness? What's the worst that could happen?

 

[markysimmo]

 

[Mulletperm]

Scary numbers

 

[Richie]

But what is the justification for anybody to own one of these weapons? It's not for hunting and, if we're being completely honest, it's not for home defence either. If the only reason left is to protect oneself from a person who has an assault weapon, then it's the chicken and egg argument. If you take away the egg, then the chicken becomes moot.

Maybe a change in the laws about these weapons also changes the public consciousness? What's the worst that could happen?

I agree, ban assault weapons. I'm not pro-gun by any means, but the situation is much more complicated that just banning certain kinds of guns or banning them outright.

You cannot rid America of guns. Handguns have been outlawed in the UK for 15 years and in 2010-11 a third of firearms offences involved a handgun, more than all other types of firearm combined (except air rifles/imitation guns). If that's the case in a country like UK with little affinity towards guns, it suggests to me nothing would change in America.

Guns are in America, 88 guns for every 100 people. Legal or not, if a criminal wants a gun he can get one, these kinds of shootings won't stop regardless of the proliferation of guns.

To an American, taking away their guns is equivalent to taking away their right to vote. Very few want an outright ban on guns. The sad part is that the kind of gun control people campaign for is the kind that already exists in New Jersey where the shooter got these guns, and it didn't stop him.

 

[Richie]

34 gun deaths in Switzerland, where every man has a gun at home as part of his military obligations, including fully automatic assault weapons.

That signals to me that the problems in the US with guns is more cultural than anything else.

A horrible mess they have made for themselves.

 

[Mulletperm]

34 gun deaths in Switzerland, where every man has a gun at home as part of his military obligations, including fully automatic assault weapons.

That signals to me that the problems in the US with guns is more cultural than anything else.

A horrible mess they have made for themselves.

It signals to me that it is insanity for a country with the cultural problems of the US not to have gun control.

If gun control stops one person murdering someone else it would have been worth it.

 

[Gordinho]

Sometimes I'm just staggered at how crass some people can be, someone thinks the picture below is some sort of gesture of support to the victims, not posting on facebook for an hour eh, that'll stop the gun lobby in their tracks.