An 11-year-old boy is in custody for murder for shooting and killing an eight-year-old neighbour girl with a shotgun . . .

by nicolaou 73 Replies latest social current

• 

  freemindfade

  The sheer amount of guns in this country makes access to them easier if one decides to commit a spree shooting, a crime, or is completely inept and irresponsible as this child's parents were. yes. As marvin has said there are overlapping issues, it is not one problem but many. When people say tighter gun control I often don't see how that will change america one bit, you may as well say all out ban, because realistically that is what would decrease (future) numbers of available guns. But restriction don't affect certain things.

  Someone who gets firearms illegally

  Someone who jumps through all the regulations and get one legally but is insane or irresponsible

  Nothing I am saying should be interpreted as advocating one way or the other, just some clarity. Real information. Like I don't think its necessary that people have assault rifles here, and there is a perception that assault rifles are why we have gun violence, when really most death is from handguns, shotgun, or rifle.

  There are multiple issues on top of one another, i saw something someone had posted that made owning a gun more like a car, it required a lot more responsibility etc. Thats great. its not going to stop the next person who wants to be America Next Spree shooter.

  I loved the Oregon appeal to never mention the shooters name in the school shooting. All the spree shooters in america have a couple things in common, guns, yes, they were all also obsessed with the mass murderers that came before. Not guns, but with the violent actions and media deification that followed.

  I will join you guys and say guns are overly accessible here. Especially by idiots. But we have that + other problems. And they should all be talked about together. As with all other spree shooters there were clear and present signs this guy was a dangerous nutcase.

  Of course this was a different story, one of negligence. If guns were banned entirely yes that girl would be alive. Its senseless. How likely is there to be a ban like that here ever? probably not likely, even with all the restrictions in the world a tragedy like this will happen as long as there are stupid and irresponsible people on earth. If you say you can only have an old single action revolver or a single shot rifle, something bad is going to happen with it.

  I want to agree that greater restriction are going to help. However in the case i don't think they would have come into play very sadly. You want to have a car its a privilege and part of that is the understanding you will follow the rules, when someone doesn't and people get hurt and killed, ultimately the responsibility rests on the driver for their poor choices.

  Just trying to give a 30,000 foot view. America pays a price, you can see the highly publicized shootings here and numbers, but part of that price is more than JUST guns. Some of the most restrictive gun law areas of america have the highest violence. We need to be honest about all the issues.
• 

  freemindfade

  What about a ban on using weapons in public places,

  Not trying to be difficult, but when i read things like this, I really think outside the U.S. a lot of you may have a large misunderstanding of the gun laws that do exist in America. I appreciate your honest questions, but using guns in public places is really not a thing here. New York City for instance, it is basically impossible to even OWN a gun much less have one in public. In New York they will lock you up and throw away the key if they even think you have a gun.

  To carry in some places yes it may be easier to get a license for that, still its not like you can just go buy a gun, put bullets in it and start walking around. That will get you server jail time here, they really don't play around with it.

  I've been around guns in america illegally and legally, in rural areas and urban. I gotta tell ya guys its not as care free as the media makes it. Its really not a modern day tombstone.
• 

  brandnew

  So sad 😢
• 

  cappytan

  Good question, having more people ask it would be an excellent start. How about a ban on assault and high capacity weaponry? What about a ban on using weapons in public places, in other words the use of guns is restricted to shooting clubs and in areas designated for hunting.
  I'm a Brit' who's never even seen a gun in all my 51 years so I know I don't have the answers. America needs to have and adult dialogue and sort it's own problem out before it leaps the Atlantic...

  Excellent responses.

  In regards to the ban on using weapons in public places except shooting clubs, that is already illegal just about everywhere. Now there are some places where it's legal to carry weapons openly in public places. Banning that, I have no problem with, and I think most liberal and moderate conservatives would feel the same way. It's only the most extreme of the extremists that think open carry is a good idea.

  On to the ban on assault and high capacity weaponry. The only reason I balk at that is because I know how guns work. And I know how politicians work. They ban things like barrel shrouds and pistol grips which do nothing for how deadly a gun is. They limit magazines to 10 rounds, not realizing that it takes maybe a day's worth of practice to learn how to eject and insert a new magazine in 1-2 seconds efficiently. I don't think a ban on assault and high-capacity weapons would be effective in curtailing violence.

  I remember the last Assault Weapons Ban...all the features they banned were cosmetic. It basically boiled down to, "If your rifle is semi-automatic, it can't have a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, can't have a pistol grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel..." The guns that were legal shot the same bullets at the same rate of fire, but just looked different. And like I said, the magazine issue isn't going to prevent crime or mass killings when all it takes is a second or two to swap an empty magazine with a full one.

  Banning all guns will help prevent the severity and frequency of rampage killings. But it won't prevent violent crime or inner city gun violence. Those guys already have the guns and are already breaking the law.
• 

  freemindfade

  i agree with Cappy

  I had an acquaintance we will call him, who purchased an AR15, semi auto, assault rifle. The state he was living in had very strict "cosmetic" restrictions on this gun. All of which were done away with by a few purchases on the internet. He also made another small purchase of a single part that he installed that made this a fully auto AR15, something that was extremely illegal in his state.

  High capacity you need to really know what that means and were does it start and stop. The maniac in Oregon was shooting people execution style. he didn't need full auto (which is completely illegal most everywhere) or semi auto. A revolver or a regular semi auto pistol, you can cause lots of damage.

  And cappy is also right about the places where the high numbers come from, the inner cities guns are virtually completely banned, and most the violence comes from illegal firearms. However the shootings like this one, and the spree shooting get the attention. Kids are shooting each other in neighborhoods of chicago, baltimore, new york, oakland, LA, and you never hear about it because they are poor kids in bad areas.
• 

  JeffT

  anything that requires a constitutional amendment to own and use should be questioned to some degree.

  
  Books?

  
  Abortions?

  As to realistic solutions, I would start with intense training, in schools, in the safe use of firearms. We're teaching kids to put condoms on bananas, they should also learn how to check the action on a gun. Requiring safe storage is not unreasonable. In the case in the OP, the parents should be charged with negligent homicide.
• 

  SecretSlaveClass

  
  

  Now I'll add my worthless two cents as a firearm owner:

  1) Where every country has its share of paranoia, the US truelly stands out (I know I've been around some). It's not only the media that bombards the population 24/7 with paranoia from crime to "yoghurt with seeds can kill you, see why at seven here on (insert TV station of choice)". Paranoia even permeates ploitics at every level and the average US gun owner believes his weapon is his/her first line of defense which brings us to the next point.

  2) A firearm should never be your first line of defense unless you are in a war zone or law enforcement facing armed criminals. Why?

  a) It creates a false sense of security. The odds of a firearm owner ever having the chance to draw his weapon on criminals armed with weapons are less than slim. I have been in a situation where I was held up while unarmed and can tell you I was thankful I wasn't armed. Not only would I have not been able to eleminate all three threats without being killed myself, but they would have stolen my firearm too, thus furnishing them with yet another tool with which to commit armed robbery and perhaps murder. Even though I had a CCW in my past employment, I never carried my side arm while off duty and to this day do not. It is for the most part poinless. There are other measures which one should take before depending on a firearm, particularly for home defense. If you would like to know what these are please ask, I would be happy to share well established measures far more effective than a firearm.

  3) There is absolutely NO reason to own an assault rifle, unless you live on the Mexican border on a ranch or are military/law enforcement. Too many people own them for the FUN factor which really gets my blood boiling. No firearm is a toy - get a paintball gun if that's your motive for wanting one. Shooting should be enjoyable but the reason for owning a firearm should not be for FUN or to be COOL. Nowhere near enough owners take the responsibility seriously enough. Ban assault rifles - period. Go to a firing range that offers them to shoot if you insist on having fun with one.

  4) Want a handgun? revolvers only. Why? even with speed loaders, it takes a lot longer to reload a revolver than a semi-auto pistol and max of 9 rounds can be fed (.22)

  5) Shotguns with five round capacity and hunting rifles with three round capacity only. If you can't bag your quarry in 5/3 shots you have no business holding a firearm let alone owning one.

  6) Anyone applying to purchase a firearm must undergo strict training followed by both live fire exams. You only get two chances at it. A system should be in place where a firearm safety inspector can visit your residence and make sure you have a certified safe installed prior to being able to collect your firearm. He should also pay random visits on firearm owners to make sure all safety rules and laws are being adhered to. Levy a special tax on ammo purchases to pay for these inspectors. I'll happily cough up if it means cuttimg the number of reckless, neglegent firearm owners out there.

  7) Punishment for violations are an absolute joke. If you are found to be criminally neglegent, immediate confiscation of all firearms, banning of purchasimg or handling firearms and community service - at ERs if possible (yes that's a bit of a push bu it would be hreat if morons got a taste of the reality of gun shot trauma).

  8) If a child or someone not registered to the weapon in question shoots someone whether accidently or purposely, the owner gets a mandatory felony charge and sentence comparable to 1st degree manslaughter.

  Don't feed me this crap that legal gun owners aren't responsible for much of the gun related deaths. Domestic violence is one of the top contributors to gun violence - these are people that aquired their weapons legally. The mass murderers? With the exception of Dylan Clebold and Eric Harris, I'm pretty sure all the others either were legal gun owners, or aquired their weapons from neglegent legal gun owners (usually parents).

  And don't even get me started on these assholes who carry assault weapons openly down their neighborhoods because in their state open carry is legal. Their pretentious, arrogant attitudes do every responsible gun owner a huge disservice. You are NOT Delta Force, you are a pathetic wannabe shit-stirrer and Id love an opportunity to put one of you in your place.

  And enough with politicians pandering to the dispicable NRA.

  Firearms are simply not seen for what they should be by way too many Americans. They are lethal tools designed for very specific applications. They are NOT status symbols. They are NOT "big boys toys". They are NOT for children under the age of 13! You do NOT need to carry 28 rounds on you outside of a shooting range. If you cannot hit your target within five shots you should not be shooting at it. Those stray bullets don't magically stop if they don't strike their intended target.

  Sorry that was more like a Monopoly dollar's worth. But there you have it.
• 

  jhine

  Marvin , I don't think that your argument about American servicemen really holds up . If being brought up around guns makes someone a good soldier then British soldiers should be rubbish and they aren't .

  So an abundance of firearms in a country doesn't really help that country have an advantage in fighting wars or keeping peace .We Brits have done our share in both . Not forgetting servicemen from all over the world not brought up in gun cultures

  . So that is not a good reason for a love affair with guns .

  Jan
• 

  nonjwspouse

  JeffT

  As to realistic solutions, I would start with intense training, in schools, in the safe use of firearms. We're teaching kids to put condoms on bananas, they should also learn how to check the action on a gun. Requiring safe storage is not unreasonable. In the case in the OP, the parents should be charged with negligent homicide.

  I second, third, and fourth this. responsibility is critical.

  I find it absurd the President of the USA's hometown has such a massive amount of Gun deaths, in which the guns are banned, yet he says NOTHING about this horrific continual daily, occurrence in his own hometown. He chooses to cherry pick politicized occurrences and exalt them into the public to press his agenda.

  it's despicable. The Chicago people lives matter too !
  
• 

  cappytan

  There is absolutely NO reason to own an assault rifle

  How do you define assault rifle?

  Because I can think of plenty of hunting situations where a semi-auto rifle is useful. (Predator, Hog and Invasive species.)