Elementary school shooting gun control pissing contest

[Fate]

Schools are usually gun free zones. You can't legally enter the premise with a concealed carry as a civilian.

I'd be all for banning all hand guns except it isn't going to ever happen in our bat shit stupid political system. Barring that, I'd prefer to send my future kids to a school where the instructors are able to do something about a mass murderer.

[Zanza]

What if the teachers were allowed to carry guns? I think this would have turned out quite differently.

Didn't he have a bullet-proof vest? I would imagine that it is quite hard for a non-professional to shoot someone who comes at you armed with an assault rifle, armored and with the intent to kill before he shoots you.

[merithyn]

What if the teachers were allowed to carry guns? I think this would have turned out quite differently.

Didn't he have a bullet-proof vest? I would imagine that it is quite hard for a non-professional to shoot someone who comes at you armed with an assault rifle, armored and with the intent to kill before he shoots you.

[Martinus]

Ok, I went to check the statistics for biggest school shootings over the last 20 years or so, and I gotta say I did not find what I was expecting:

1989 - Montreal, Canada - 14 dead
1996 - Dunblane, UK - 17 dead
1999 - Columbine, US - 13 dead
2002 - Erfurt, Germany - 16 dead
2006 - Shiguan, China - 12 dead
2007 - Blacksburg, US - 32 dead
2008 - Kauhajoki, Finland - 12 dead
2009 - Winnenden, Germany - 15 dead
2009 - Baku, Azerbajian - 12 dead
2010 - Linchang, China - 10 dead
2011 - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - 12 dead
2012 - Newtown, US - 27 dead

This does not seem to support the existence of a significant correlation between gun control laws and these incidents. 

If anything, this seems to suggests one thing we new already - Americans think they are special and overreact when shit that happens all over the world happens to them.

[crazy canuck]

That this thread is twice as long as the one it spawned from tells you something about human nature right there.

Yes, it tells you that people feel the need to find reasonable laws that will prevent this kind of tragedy in the future

[Martinus]

That this thread is twice as long as the one it spawned from tells you something about human nature right there.

Yes, it tells you that people feel the need to find reasonable laws that will prevent this kind of tragedy in the future

Only that global statistics of such tragedies seem to imply no correlation between laws and the chance of them happening. Germany and China are quite high on the list, despite having very tight gun control laws, for example.

[crazy canuck]

If anything, this seems to suggests one thing we new already - Americans think they are special and overreact when shit that happens all over the world happens to them.

You find new ways to amaze

[Zanza]

The guns used in the German massacres in Erfurt and Winnenden were legal under our strict law. The first shooter was member of a shooting club and had a permit to own the guns. The second shooter's father had a permit and was allowed to keep the weapons at home. So even with strict laws shooters can get legal weapons with some preparation. If the deed is planned long-term, and that doesn't seem to be unusual in these cases, it is possible to get a legal weapon.

[Martim Silva]

Ok, I went to check the statistics for biggest school shootings over the last 20 years or so, and I gotta say I did not find what I was expecting:

1989 - Montreal, Canada - 14 dead
1996 - Dunblane, UK - 17 dead
1999 - Columbine, US - 13 dead
2002 - Erfurt, Germany - 16 dead
2006 - Shiguan, China - 12 dead
2007 - Blacksburg, US - 32 dead
2008 - Kauhajoki, Finland - 12 dead
2009 - Winnenden, Germany - 15 dead
2009 - Baku, Azerbajian - 12 dead
2010 - Linchang, China - 10 dead
2011 - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - 12 dead
2012 - Newtown, US - 27 dead

This does not seem to support the existence of a significant correlation between gun control laws and these incidents. 

You're only looking at school shootings. Factor in also "movie theater shootings", "mall shootings", "office shootings" and the like.

Also, note at the locations of the shooting - the US gets three major incidents, Germany two, and all the others go to a different nation. Everone can get a nut once, but more than once and it's not an isolated incident anymore.

According to this article on CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/23/opinion/webster-aurora-shooter/index.html), the US has a murder rate seven times higher than other high-income nations and almost 20 times the gun murder with guns.

Also note that the US has had 12 mass shootings (against innocents) in the last 12 months. How many other countries can say the same? The other kinds of large-scale shootings (like in Mexico) are criminals fighting amongst themselves.

America does not have a problem with "isolated elements" - there are many crazies around with easy access to guns, period.

[Razgovory]

What if the teachers were allowed to carry guns? I think this would have turned out quite differently.

Didn't he have a bullet-proof vest? I would imagine that it is quite hard for a non-professional to shoot someone who comes at you armed with an assault rifle, armored and with the intent to kill before he shoots you.

You know he's trolling right?

[Fate]

What if the teachers were allowed to carry guns? I think this would have turned out quite differently.

Didn't he have a bullet-proof vest? I would imagine that it is quite hard for a non-professional to shoot someone who comes at you armed with an assault rifle, armored and with the intent to kill before he shoots you.

You know he's trolling right?

I live in Midland, Texas. That kind of view isn't trolling - it's the view of a supermajority. Obama got 18% of the vote here this year.

[Fate]

What if the teachers were allowed to carry guns? I think this would have turned out quite differently.

Didn't he have a bullet-proof vest? I would imagine that it is quite hard for a non-professional to shoot someone who comes at you armed with an assault rifle, armored and with the intent to kill before he shoots you.

Let's say grumbler was in the classroom adjacent from Ms. Sandy Hook (who died after hiding her children from the gunman.) He hears the shots. He unholsters his hand gun and proceeds to ambush the killer as he exits Ms. Hook's classroom. The vest isn't an argument against arming teachers. You shoot someone with a bullet proof vest and they are going to be stunned. It feels like a baseball bat hit you.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Incidentally, I wonder if anyone has ever compiled statistics on what percentage of shooters already own guns beforehand and what percentage go out to buy one after devising the plan to start a shoot out.

I think it would be an interesting factor as to whether background/psych checks at the moment of purchase are enough or whether all gun owners should undergo these from time to time.

I used Wikipedia to look up the last 10 or so mass shooters in the US, most of them bought all or some of the guns used in their shooting in a small period of time before the shooting itself. Some used guns belonging to other people that they had easy access to.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I am no gun nut.

I don't think the 2nd Amendment protects anyone's "right" to own a handgun.

Even if it did, I would argue that it is a stupid "right", and should be repealed. The right to tote around a gun is NOT, IMO, a fundamental human right, or necessary to a free society. This is easily proven by noting that there are plenty of perfectly free societies that function quite well without the citizens therein being allowed to pack a gun.

All that being said, gun control won't stop things like this from happening. No amount of it that is realistically possible in the US today will make any difference. There are already too many guns, and too ingrained of a culture to matter in any meaningful manner.

I tend to think it does, and think the Roberts court actually got Heller "right." If you read the Heller decision, despite how vilified the Roberts court is by the left (and in many cases with justification) Scalia actually makes a sound argument. Basically, if you haven't read the ruling, the majority held:

1. The linguistic structure of the Second Amendment is consistent with other declarations of rights written around that time in America. The "regulated militia" prefatory clause is no indication that the objective clause which declares the right is only in existence because fo the prefatory clause. Many declarations of rights have a prefatory clause with an "example of why this right is important" in early American State constitutions and etc, and those prefatory clauses were never intended to limit the scope of the right being declared.

2. The Second Amendment is not an individual right to own any weapon by anyone with no regulations. It leaves the door open for various regulatory schemes.

3. However, it says the second amendment is an individual right to own firearms.

4. It further says, it is an individual right to own firearms in "common usage", and that handguns are "common usage" so while regulations on firearms are constitutional blanket bans on handguns are not, because they are a firearm in common usage. They specifically do not overturn Miller, and still assert bans on weapons not in common usage are fine (things like Tommy guns which inspired the 1934 NFA.) The door is still open on regulations of magazine capacities and things like that. And a licensing regime would not run afoul of any of the plaintext of the ruling.

5. It also states an intrinsic right to self defense, and says gun regulations cannot be written in such a way as to deny someone the means to use a gun in their home for self defense.

[Razgovory]

What if the teachers were allowed to carry guns? I think this would have turned out quite differently.

Didn't he have a bullet-proof vest? I would imagine that it is quite hard for a non-professional to shoot someone who comes at you armed with an assault rifle, armored and with the intent to kill before he shoots you.

You know he's trolling right?

I live in Midland, Texas. That kind of view isn't trolling - it's the view of a supermajority. Obama got 18% of the vote here this year.

Midland, Texas isn't posting.  You are.  Your bland and obvious trolling is one of your least likeable traits.  That and your tendency to cut people into little bits.