Support NeoGAF

[NathanMcMahon]

Haven't flown anywhere in the last 12 years, have you?

Also, it's a shooting, plain and simple. Calling it a "terrorist attack" is an extremely weak argument of semantics that's intellectually vacuous.

He's been programmed, it may be a lost cause.

 

[I H8 Memes]

The solution IS to stop fearing guns and start using them.

You think I'm a gun nut, but I'm just a realist. Guns exist in our world. Criminals have them and use them. Banning them, at best, will make it more difficult for criminals to obtain and use them, but not impossible, and will absolutely leave law-abiding citizens at their mercy. That's unacceptable. As an American, gun ownership is part of our very fiber. It's in the Constitution. It is as much a grave responsibility as it is a right.

Tighten the rules. Raise the standards for gun ownership. But there is no such thing as a disarmed free people.

Is this the part where we all stand up and say the Pledge of Allegiance. I wonder what a person like you must think it's like in other "free" countries of the world. Do you think they all walk around like hyper-anxiety infused versions of Don Knotts? Too scared to speak without stuttering due to their fear that at any moment someone is going to shoot them and their family.

No they do not. Because they don't have to worry about about criminals having guns because their laws make it very unlikely that a criminal will have a gun. people like you are the reason criminals have this guns in this country. from re-sellers to weak background checks to stolen weapons, all of those guns started out as legal sales.


Edit: In addition let me address this absolute gem of propaganda "But there is no such thing as a disarmed free people.".

You know there is a freedom index. A scale if you will. Much like how countries are graded on obesity, corruption, access to health care, and despite whatever propaganda you've heard America is not the most "free" country. I cant even remember if we ranked in the top 10. But most if not all of the countries in the top 10 have strict gun control.

But you probably shouldn't bring that up at the next Tea Party meeting lest you be branded as some kind of Socialist commie lover.

 

[Tapiozona]

What if it wasn't in the constitution anymore?

Technically it really doesn't exist in the constitution.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As passed by Congress

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

as ratified by states.

The intention of the 2nd amendment was that the people would form the army of the nation through state organized militias. The Continental Army was disbanded after the revolutionary war because they did not trust a standing army. The duty of protecting the country fell to state run militias. Of course we now have a standing army and organized militias are no longer used. The second amendment has 0 application to current times.

 

[HiredN00bs]

And what do we do when that first sane, responsible, law abiding trained individual shoots a student? And what do we do the second time it happens? And what do we do when that sane, responsible, law abiding trained individual's gun is stolen by a student and that student shoots a kid? What do we do the second and third time that happens?

Arming teachers is a ridiculous fucking idea.

We teach students respect and responsibility for the firearms as well. We end the culture of withdrawal and ignorance and misguided extreme pacifism. Your counter example is also contradictory: a sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adult would not:

a) shoot a student unless it was necessary (for example, the student is shooting other students)

b) allow their gun to be stolen (because they would also be trained in how to prevent that)

I love when gun control nuts act like anyone who carries a gun is itching to use it. Just imagine if you carried a gun. I can say that if I did, it would take a lot for me to use it in the public. It would have to be miles beyond any shadow of doubt. Responsible adults will always look for every reason NOT to use a gun.

 

[Tapiozona]

Instead of an apology how about you change your avatar to pointing up:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Killer-Had-Visited-Home-To-Deliver-Furniture-3270635.php

Says nothing about running out of ammo and that he would have killed both intruders had he had more. No apology.

 

[Novid]

Ima call it like i see it.

American Conservitism is dead.

 

[NathanMcMahon]

Technically it really doesn't exist in the constitution.

As passed by Congress

as ratified by states.

The intention of the 2nd amendment was that the people would form the standing army of the nation through state organized militias. The Continental Army was disbanded after the revolutionary war because they did not trust a standing army. The duty of protecting the country fell to state run militias. Of course we now have a standing army and organized militias are no longer used. The second amendment has 0 application to current times.

I know, I'm just interested in this idea that it's in our constitution so it's untouchable but if it was legally "touched" in the proper amending process what the people who are so adamant about it would do? They claim to be law-abiding citizens but if the law was changed I suspect many of them wouldn't be so quick to embrace the constitution then. I guess I should quit trying to trap people and just say what I mean. I find the conundrum of this interesting and really think taking people's guns is impossible, impractical, and really not right to some degree on that last one. There are interesting points to be made, but it seems almost impossible to get an answer to any sane question when other members constantly obfuscate and say "what about this scenario?" in response. I think it's just a general inability to articulate or cogently argue a valid point.

 

[monchi-kun]

The intention of the 2nd amendment was that the people would form the army of the nation through state organized militias. The Continental Army was disbanded after the revolutionary war because they did not trust a standing army. The duty of protecting the country fell to state run militias. Of course we now have a standing army and organized militias are no longer used. The second amendment has 0 application to current times.

Another reason to amend the amendment is the advances in firearms design and technology. That was written during a time when most people could own a musket! It needs to be updated based on the requirements and realities of modern day weaponry.

 

[Dirtsaw]

Says nothing about running out of ammo and that he would have killed both intruders had he had more. No apology.

Then keep researching, and when you done please change your avatar.

 

[HiredN00bs]

Is this the part where we all stand up and say the Pledge of Allegiance. I wonder what a person like you must think it's like in other "free" countries of the world. Do you think they all walk around like hyper-anxiety infused versions of Don Knotts? Too scared to speak without stuttering due to their fear that at any moment someone is going to shoot them and their family.

No they do not. Because they don't have to worry about about criminals having guns because their laws make it very unlikely that a criminal will have a gun. people like you are the reason criminals have this guns in this country. from re-sellers to weak background checks to stolen weapons, all of those guns started out as legal sales.


Edit: In addition let me address this absolute gem of propaganda "But there is no such thing as a disarmed free people.".

You know there is a freedom index. A scale if you will. Much like how countries are graded on obesity, corruption, access to health care, and despite whatever propaganda you've heard America is not the most "free" country. I cant even remember if we ranked in the top 10. But most if not all of the countries in the top 10 have strict gun control.

But you probably shouldn't bring that up at the next Tea Party meeting lest you be branded as some kind of Socialist commie lover.

Sensational.

Would love to see that freedom index ranking.

I don't know much about other countries in the world, but its very easy to get into chicken/egg scenarios in comparing them to the United States.

 

[Killa Sasa]

The cartridge family episode of the Simpsons was dead on IMO.

Civilians with guns are for keeping the king of England out of your face. Sport ones not withstanding of course.

Canadian looking in and facepalming through my skull at some of the stuff people in relative power say, do and hold ideologically. I mean, to each their own, but damn, smh doesn't begin to describe the self parody... Hope this gets figured out, for Sanity's sake.

 

[Angry Fork]

Tighten the rules. Raise the standards for gun ownership. But there is no such thing as a disarmed free people.

Except for most highly developed countries that do have disarmed people and are still able to be free. Gun ownership is not the fundamental driver of 'freedom', it's not a factor in it at all.

 

[RDreamer]

We teach students respect and responsibility for the firearms as well. We end the culture of withdrawal and ignorance and misguided extreme pacifism. Your counter example is also contradictory: a sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adult would not:

a) shoot a student unless it was necessary (for example, the student is shooting other students)

b) allow their gun to be stolen (because they would also be trained in how to prevent that)

I love when gun control nuts act like anyone who carries a gun is itching to use it. Just imagine if you carried a gun. I can say that if I did, it would take a lot for me to use it in the public. It would have to be miles beyond any shadow of doubt.

That's a nice, completely farcical worldview you've got there. Someone is either sane and responsible, law abiding, or they are not, and we will somehow be able to tell the difference between the two until the end of time. That sane person will never snap or change. They will also never ever allow their gun to be stolen. Nope, never.

This isn't about gun control nuts acting like anyone who carries a gun is itching to use it. It's about realism. It's about knowing that statistically, people can indeed go from totally sane (or just seeming that way from the outside vantage point) to terrible in what seems like the blink of an eye. The human psyche and humans in general are fragile creatures.

There are no "good people" and "bad people." We, in general, tend to swerve back and forth betwixt the two, some people swerving far, far more than others can imagine. If you are giving guns to who you deem to be responsible people, then there's still a statistical chance that some of them are not, and the more you hand out the more that statistic goes up. That's reality. The more you try and control for some of these circumstances and put in some sorts of failsafes, the more that statistic goes down. People who advocate for gun control aren't sitting here thinking all people with guns are maniacs. They're thinking that, statistically, some will be, and we don't want however few that is to exist... or at least we want that number to go down.

 

[King_Moc]

The solution IS to stop fearing guns and start using them.

You think I'm a gun nut, but I'm just a realist. Guns exist in our world. Criminals have them and use them. Banning them, at best, will make it more difficult for criminals to obtain and use them, but not impossible, and will absolutely leave law-abiding citizens at their mercy. That's unacceptable. As an American, gun ownership is part of our very fiber. It's in the Constitution. It is as much a grave responsibility as it is a right.

Tighten the rules. Raise the standards for gun ownership. But there is no such thing as a disarmed free people.

Do you believe this? Like, really? I find that unbelievable. Do you genuinely think that all the countries where guns are banned have a populace that is controlled in a Totalitarian manner by their government?

In the USA, there is roughly 1 gun owned per person in the country. The next country down on that list is Serbia, on 0.58 guns per person. And that country used to be a FUCKING WARZONE. Given that the only use a gun has is to kill, you've got to a admit, there's a problem there.

 

[Novid]

NRA didnt say nothing blaiming the vidya gmaes in Colombine
Nor Virgina Tech.
How about Auora? No...
Phoenix?
Now you blame it all on us?

These Baby Fucking Boomers dont FUCKING GET IT now do they? Nice for you to stab somebody in the back you once defended.

 

[HiredN00bs]

Except for most highly developed countries that do have disarmed people and are still able to be free. Gun ownership is not the fundamental driver of 'freedom', it's not a factor in it at all.

Not every country is the same. What works for one may not work for another. Let's say you have an island where guns are banned. As a matter of fact, there aren't many guns on the island, maybe a few that the police have.

Now let's say there's another island FILLED with guns. The police have them. The criminals have them (and there are more criminals than police) and the people have them. Now this island make guns illegal. Where does that leave the people?

 

[empty vessel]

We teach students respect and responsibility for the firearms as well. We end the culture of withdrawal and ignorance and misguided extreme pacifism. Your counter example is also contradictory: a sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adult would not:

a) shoot a student unless it was necessary (for example, the student is shooting other students)

b) allow their gun to be stolen (because they would also be trained in how to prevent that)

Rather, it shows the naivete of your argument. There is no such thing as a sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adult nor, even if there were, any way to identify them. You are literally proposing a fantasy world as a solution to a problem in the real world. In the real world, people--even sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adults--have bad days in which they are not responsible, or not law-abiding. Trained people have days on which their training fails them. Sane people can become mentally ill. So, in fact, a sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adult would indeed: a) shoot a student unnecessarily (cops do it all the time); and (b) allow their gun to be stolen (cops get shot with their own weapons more than you'd care to know). If you arm teachers, it is absolutely inevitable that one of them will eventually unnecessarily shoot a student.

I love when gun control nuts act like anyone who carries a gun is itching to use it. Just imagine if you carried a gun. I can say that if I did, it would take a lot for me to use it in the public. It would have to be miles beyond any shadow of doubt.

This is a response to something you wish I had posted rather than what I in fact posted.

 

[strobogo]

So in the past 3 years, have their actually been more shootings, or have their just been higher death counts in said shootings?


Also, the idea that the NRA basically thinks the solution to gun violence is instituting Mutual Assured Destruction. It worked for Reagan, it'll work for us!

 

[HiredN00bs]

That's a nice, completely farcical worldview you've got there. Someone is either sane and responsible, law abiding, or they are not, and we will somehow be able to tell the difference between the two until the end of time. That sane person will never snap or change. They will also never ever allow their gun to be stolen. Nope, never.

This isn't about gun control nuts acting like anyone who carries a gun is itching to use it. It's about realism. It's about knowing that statistically, people can indeed go from totally sane (or just seeming that way from the outside vantage point) to terrible in what seems like the blink of an eye. The human psyche and humans in general are fragile creatures.

There are no "good people" and "bad people." We, in general, tend to swerve back and forth betwixt the two, some people swerving far, far more than others can imagine. If you are giving guns to who you deem to be responsible people, then there's still a statistical chance that some of them are not, and the more you hand out the more that statistic goes up. That's reality. The more you try and control for some of these circumstances and put in some sorts of failsafes, the more that statistic goes down. People who advocate for gun control aren't sitting here thinking all people with guns are maniacs. They're thinking that, statistically, some will be, and we don't want however few that is to exist... or at least we want that number to go down.

Maybe you haven't been reading these threads. You're in the minority.

 

[speculawyer]

Ima call it like i see it.

American Conservitism is dead.

It is more bankrupt than dead. At this point it is just a bunch of rich people wanting tax cuts & regulation cuts that fund the operation and get votes dangling a few carrots in front of simpleton one-issue voters with issues such as abortion, gunz, and gays.

Fiscal conservatism? LOL. They are one the ones that created these massive deficits with two unfunded wars, Medicare Part D, and simultaneous tax cuts. Goldwater, Eisenhower, and Nixon are spinning in their graves.

 

[computers putin']

Lets just give everybody a gun at this point, for "protection" smh.

 

[rac]

Hardly. The point was that mass murderers appear to choose their targets intelligently, at least enough of the time for it to be taken under consideration, and one intending mass murder at a gun range wouldn't get very far.

And how do you know this? Everyone at a gun range is prepared for a person to come in and spontaneously shoot at them?

 

[speculawyer]

Do you believe this? Like, really? I find that unbelievable. Do you genuinely think that all the countries where guns are banned have a populace that is controlled in a Totalitarian manner by their government?

He watches all the cop hero TV shows and cop hero movies and thinks that is the way real life is.

 

[Kingbrave]

I don't understand the argument "If you ban guns then only criminals will have guns.." because criminals have them now. They obviously don't care about the law so they will get them anyway.

 

[BocoDragon]

Not every country is the same. What works for one may not work for another. Let's say you have an island where guns are banned. As a matter of fact, there aren't many guns on the island, maybe a few that the police have.

Now let's say there's another island FILLED with guns. The police have them. The criminals have them (and there are more criminals than police) and the people have them. Now this island make guns illegal. Where does that leave the people?

But the reason this island is filled with guns is because of so many people who wanted guns to defend against other people.

Arms race.

Now it's fine if you want to argue that America has become some special place where guns have proliferated so much that gun ownership is prudent........ But that invalidates the "guns enable a free society" ideology. Guns are just here to fix an unnatural problem: lots of guns

Guns don't enable freedom naturally. They enable freedom in places where gun ownership has been proliferated, ironically, by those who think guns enable freedom naturally

 

[HiredN00bs]

Rather, it shows the naivete of your argument. There is no such thing as a sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adult nor, even if there were, any way to identify them. You are literally proposing a fantasy world as a solution to a problem in the real world. In the real world, people--even sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained adults--have bad days in which they are not responsible, or not law-abiding.

And this shows the disparity between our world views. I believe there are such people and I believe that you can identify and screen for them within reason and I believe that such people can maintain even on the worst fucking day of their life and I believe that I am one of them. So there.

 

[Kingbrave]

And this shows the disparity between our world views. I believe there are such people and I believe that you can identify and screen for them within reason and I believe that such people can maintain even on the worst fucking day of their life and I believe that I am one of them. So there.

In this wonderful made up world you have, who decides what is sane and what isn't? Am I insane for eating peanut butter and mustard? What are the qualifiers for sanity and if and for how long you can stay sane? Have you always been calm and rational? Ever lost your temper?

 

[SillyEskimo]

An armed guard in every school? Sounds like a very expensive, major government expansion and intrusion in the life of private citizens. Also, who is going to pay for this? You would think Republicans would be up in arms at this suggestion by the NRA.

There are districts that cannot afford new text books or pay teachers. But hey, let's dip into their funding for armed guards.

Btw, the conspiricy nuts would have a field day with this scenerio. I would live to hear what armed guards in elementary schools has to do with the Illuminati and the NWO!

 

[NathanMcMahon]

He watches all the cop hero TV shows and cop hero movies and thinks that is the way real life is.

I know it's stalking, but looking at his post history is actually interesting in context. He seems to only really engage in the gaming side and mostly Halo specific threads, at least looking back for a little over a month. I find that people who pop into OT and don't really know what they are talking about have a hard time adapting to a genuine conversation regarding real issues. They often ignore responses and genuine questions from other members and focus on very easy details that are understandable to comprehend and engage in and yet they still fall flat on their face most of the time. Truly astounding how often it happens.

 

[speculawyer]

And this shows the disparity between our world views. I believe there are such people and I believe that you can identify and screen for them within reason and I believe that such people can maintain even on the worst fucking day of their life and I believe that I am one of them. So there.

Yes, you have showed us how poor your judgement is, you don't need to affirm it for us more.

 

[HiredN00bs]

But the reason this island is filled with guns is because of so many people who wanted guns to defend against other people.

Arms race.

Now it's fine if you want to argue that America has become some special place where guns have proliferated so much that gun ownership is prudent........ But that invalidates the "guns enable a free society" ideology. Guns are just here to fix an unnatural problem.

Guns don't enable freedom naturally. They enable freedom in places where gun ownership has been proliferated, ironically, by those who think guns enable freedom naturally

Perhaps. Also, let us not forget that a very large reason peaceful countries can exist without firearms is because they conveniently face no intruder, or because there are those with arms who would protect them. Like the good ol' arms-proliferated US of A.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Canada, Japan, most of Europe, and many other countries are magical fantasy lands? I think you have bought into fear paranoia that makes you believe that living in the US means you need a firearm.

Bad things never happen there and everything is perfect? You're deluding yourself with such nonesense. I love Canada, Japan and Europe but they have their issues as well.

Just get a dog if you want to feel safe.

Why feel the need to tell a man who has committed no crime against anyone what he should or shouldn't do? Am I telling anyone in this thread they should get a gun? You do your thing, let me do mine. If I'm not committing a crime it should be a non-issue. Unless you have this nagging desire to tell others how *you* want them to live.

I got an alarm and a 12ga that's only been used to punch holes in paper. Chill.

 

[Angry Fork]

And this shows the disparity between our world views. I believe there are such people and I believe that you can identify and screen for them within reason and I believe that such people can maintain even on the worst fucking day of their life and I believe that I am one of them. So there.

Even Robocop couldn't be perfect and he was a machine.

 

[HiredN00bs]

Bad things never happen there and everything is perfect? You're deluding yourself with such nonesense. I love Canada, Japan and Europe but they have their issues as well.



Why feel the need to tell a man who has committed no crime against anyone what he should or shouldn't do? Am I telling anyone in this thread they should get a gun? You do your thing, let me do mine. If I'm not committing a crime it should be a non-issue. Unless you have this nagging desire to tell others how *you* want them to live.

I got an alarm and a 12ga that's only been used to punch holes in paper. Chill.

Taggin' out.

 

[The Technomancer]

Why feel the need to tell a man who has committed no crime against anyone what he should or shouldn't do? Am I telling anyone in this thread they should get a gun? You do your thing, let me do mine. If I'm not committing a crime it should be a non-issue. Unless you have this nagging desire to tell others how *you* want them to live.

No-one is a criminal until they suddenly are. And when they cross that line they shouldn't have access to weapons that allow for mass-murder in a matter of seconds.

 

[Jobiensis]

Perhaps. Also, let us not forget that a very large reason peaceful countries can exist without firearms is because they conveniently face no intruder, or because there are those with arms who would protect them. Like the good ol' arms-proliferated US of A.

When was the last time armed citizens (not military) of the U.S. protected people from another country? I don't think anybody is calling for the disarming of the military.

 

[NathanMcMahon]

Perhaps. Also, let us not forget that a very large reason peaceful countries can exist without firearms is because they conveniently face no intruder, or because there are those with arms who would protect them. Like the good ol' arms-proliferated US of A.

What intruder has the US faced that a private citizen stopped from causing harm? Also, what private US citizen has protected another country with their guns?

NVM, he can't make a decent argument, so he's "taggin' out" guys. He's probably aware of how fucking over his head this entire thing is. It's dangerous territory treading water in unfamiliar threads.

 

[empty vessel]

And this shows the disparity between our world views. I believe there are such people and I believe that you can identify and screen for them within reason and I believe that such people can maintain even on the worst fucking day of their life and I believe that I am one of them. So there.

I am glad you think so highly of yourself. Your belief that no sane, responsible, law-abiding, trained individual has ever needlessly fatally shot anybody with a firearm is naive.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

It's not an internet meme, and yes, the .223 will kill you quickly. My point is that on the scale of ammunition available, it is not really very powerful.



You have just fallen prey to a common trap for young players. That rifle is functionally equivalent to an AR15. It is semi automatic, fires a full power round, it it even looks to have a flash hider on it.

Ignorance is bliss. "Ban the scary things that don't look like tools for killing deer!"

 

[Kingbrave]

What intruder has the US faced that a private citizen stopped from causing harm? Also, what private US citizen has protected another country with their guns? NVM, he can't make a decent argument, so he's "taggin' out" guys. He's probably aware of how fucking over his head this entire thing is. It's dangerous territory treading water in unfamiliar threads.

Have you not seen Red Dawn?! That's how it will be...I bet I could stop a tank with my .22!

 

[NathanMcMahon]

Have you not seen Red Dawn?! That's how it will be...I bet I could stop a tank with my .22!

It better explode too.

 

[gutter_trash]

I don't understand the argument "If you ban guns then only criminals will have guns.." because criminals have them now. They obviously don't care about the law so they will get them anyway.

guns are manufactured in the US. If badguys get there hands on them, then there are big huge holes on the sale of guns, gunshows and enforcement of gun laws.

Lets say that the US did not manufacture as many guns as they do... by God maybe there would be less guns in their hands of criminals>??

 

[Angry Fork]

Bad things never happen there and everything is perfect? You're deluding yourself with such nonesense. I love Canada, Japan and Europe but they have their issues as well.

Why do people do this. It's such a sleazy side step and arguing against something that wasn't even said. Nobody in this thread at all has said that Japan is perfect, all they've said is Japan works fine without guns everywhere. 'Fine' being they're not under a one party state.

Of course Japan has 'other problems' but why are you mentioning that if nobody else has. Those other problems Japan has? America has many of them too. But America also has the gun problem and Japan doesn't. A lot more people are killed in America because of this problem (and many others that Japan doesn't have like obesity).

Ignorance is bliss. "Ban the scary things that don't look like tools for killing deer!"

Hunting should be banned too.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

No-one is a criminal until they suddenly are. And when they cross that line they shouldn't have access to weapons that allow for mass-murder in a matter of seconds.

So instead of treating every adult person in a society as a responsible citizen until they prove otherwise we should just assume they're all maniacs waiting to happen and give them as little freedom as possible lest they do something terrible?

Thanks but fuck that bullshit. I enjoy the freedoms that the Second Amendment to the Constitution currently provides and see no reason to give it up willingly.

I say deal with poverty, deal with education, deal with storage in the home, deal with mental illness. But that's a small compromise to someone whose goal isn't a lowering of violent crime while respecting the Second Amendment but a repeal of the Second Amendment, period. Or an alteration of the definition of the Second Amendment to the point that it's made effectively useless for the original reasons it was created. (Hence the "B-B-But those were olden times" and the classic "LOLZ King George's Comin yo!"

 

[ari]

America, chalk this shit up under the "this is why we can't have good things" tab and move on. pretty sure life will go on. That being said, i hate to see this topic under this administration where conservatives was calling this from the get go.

"see, Obama is a socialist pussy" (rush Lambaugh)

 

[Kingbrave]

guns are manufactured in the US. If badguys get there hands on them, then there are big huge holes on the sale of guns, gunshows and enforcement of gun laws.

Lets say that the US did not manufacture as many guns as they do... by God maybe there would be less guns in their hands of criminals>??

They'd just steal them from us honest deer slayers! Ever try to rob a 7/11 with a huntin' rifle?


I'm all for guns. I live in an area where everyone hunts. I hunt. I also believe that if it is harder to get a gun/weapon when they snap and want to kill, then do it. If it saves even 1 person...

 

[strobogo]

And how do you know this? Everyone at a gun range is prepared for a person to come in and spontaneously shoot at them?

That's a point no one makes. Even if everyone has guns and are trained to handle and shoot guns, that doesn't at all mean that they are trained and ready for attacks and shootings out of the blue. You'd have to basically train everyone in military tactics or else you just have a bunch of people with guns who won't know how to react when someone opens fire on them.

 

[GhaleonEB]

And this shows the disparity between our world views. I believe there are such people and I believe that you can identify and screen for them within reason and I believe that such people can maintain even on the worst fucking day of their life and I believe that I am one of them. So there.

Does your world view allow for kids who would like nothing more than to steal the teacher's gun? I know my high school had plenty of kids who would have taken that as a personal challenge. I have no doubt some would succeed at some point.

 

[The Technomancer]

So instead of treating every adult person in a society as a responsible citizen until they prove otherwise we should just assume they're all maniacs waiting to happen and give them as little freedom as possible lest they do something terrible?

"As little freedom as possible"? Really? That's how you describe restrictions on owning guns designed specifically for killing or injuring a large number of things very quickly? Do you also think its your right to own chemical weapons? After all, you're responsible. Explosives? Should you be able to store enough explosives to blow up your block in your basement because saying otherwise would be patronizing you?

 

[antonz]

No-one is a criminal until they suddenly are. And when they cross that line they shouldn't have access to weapons that allow for mass-murder in a matter of seconds.

This kid was known to be dangerous to the point his mother was working on getting him committed. He tried to buy guns and couldn't.

The only failure in this situation is the MOTHER. Who knew he was sick and still let him have access to her guns.