NRA calls for armed police officers in all U.S. schools

[CaptainCrunch]

I thought this might be needed here. There's a interactive map on the link I've posted that will give all the information on mass shootings in the States, if you hover over the dots you will see the details including weapons used and if they were obtained legally

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...-shootings-map

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

Look at the loss of life in another way that isnt gun related ? Before anyone says , hey your arguing for no gun control at all , you're an American Devil.... I am not. I'm just saying if we are going to place all this hate on gun , we should also place it on other needless vehicles of human casualty.

How many people in here drink beer? Drunk Driving fatalities were something like 120,000 deaths in the last 10 years in the US. This is more than the aforementioned gun death quote in the last decade ( 100,000 people in the last decade). I don't hear a ton of people saying there needs to be tighter alcohol laws?


So on that note AFC what benefit does alcohol have that makes 10,000 plus deaths a year seem like a reasonable cost?

None, but the only country that ever tried to ban it found that had more negatives in the end and gave up, what we do with alcohol though is massively regulate it to minimise the negatives.

Unlike alcohol, when countries get rid of guns (the UK Australia Canada to a lesser degree) the bans are very effective, there being no way to 'home brew' guns

[CaptainCrunch]

I don't think I've ever seen one person deliberately kill another person with Alcohol. That's a self choice.

Gun violence is completely different.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't think I've ever seen one person deliberately kill another person with Alcohol. That's a self choice.

Gun violence is completely different.

I would argue though that within the cost benefit context it makes no difference, alcohol does have a massive cost to society and it would be a positive if it could be banned.

[CaptainCrunch]

I don't think that this is the place for a prohibition discussion around liquor.

[nickerjones]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

None, but the only country that ever tried to ban it found that had more negatives in the end and gave up, what we do with alcohol though is massively regulate it to minimise the negatives.

Unlike alcohol, when countries get rid of guns (the UK Australia Canada to a lesser degree) the bans are very effective, there being no way to 'home brew' guns

Massively regulating it and minimizing the negatives means 120,000 deaths is ok? I would love to see the alcohol related fatalities of the dry counties in texas or in other places that have tighter regulations. For example in Oklahoma you can't buy hard alcohol in grocery stores. Hell you can only buy 3.2% beer in Oklahoma compared to 5% else where.

This is off topic but you could see where I was going. In conclusion to my arguments I think it's clear some form of control is needed. It will be a rough thing to push through , especially in the Southern States. Thanks to most of you for being respectful and not just calling me another American Dumbass.
Although I have a feeling a few of you were thinking it.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

No , your arguments have been more rational and respectful than most people I have spoken with on my trip here. It's different cultures and , let's be honest , if they ban guns in America am I going to be Ok? Yeah I'll be fine. I mainly use any of my guns for hunting and I'm pretty sure even here hunting rifles are legal.

I think it would take about 10 or 15 years to flush them out but if the US did follow most of the rest of the worlds lead you would be suprised at the day to day difference it would make to you.

I foster native kids who are all mostly gang members in Vancouvers skid row, a crap hole most americans would be shocked at, none the less I can leave my door unlocked 24/7 handle my severely drugged out kids with no fear they or their friends will have a gun, having talked to foster parents out of the US this is completely alien to them.

There isn't anywhere in Vancouver that I am worried to go into, there are places I might get punched out in, but there is pretty well no chance I will get shot anywhere, uit never even enters my head to worry about guns.

[Caged Great]

I think that they should follow the 2nd amendment to the letter as it was signed back when it was.

Bring back the muskets.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

There isn't anywhere in Vancouver that I am worried to go into, there are places I might get punched out in, but there is pretty well no chance I will get shot anywhere, uit never even enters my head to worry about guns.

You must be immune to the constant gang land shootings that do claim innocent lives from time to time - since it barely makes the news anymore, I am not surprised.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

You must be immune to the constant gang land shootings that do claim innocent lives from time to time - since it barely makes the news anymore, I am not surprised.

I know (and worked with) many of the gangsters that have been shot and thus far I am only aware of two civilians that got shot, both in the Surrey 6 killing, granted i don't count girlfriends of gangsters as civilians

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I thought this might be needed here. There's a interactive map on the link I've posted that will give all the information on mass shootings in the States, if you hover over the dots you will see the details including weapons used and if they were obtained legally

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...-shootings-map

or you can just follow all gun deaths on twitter

https://twitter.com/GunDeaths

[Displaced Flames fan]

Is there actually anyone in here advocating a total ban on guns?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

How many people in here drink beer? Drunk Driving fatalities were something like 120,000 deaths in the last 10 years in the US. This is more than the aforementioned gun death quote in the last decade ( 100,000 people in the last decade). I don't hear a ton of people saying there needs to be tighter alcohol laws?


So on that note AFC what benefit does alcohol have that makes 10,000 plus deaths a year seem like a reasonable cost?

First of all, I'll also jump in an apolagize if it seems like I'm ragging on you, or implying that you're a redneck American, it's not my intent. It's just this latest shooting involving kids really got to me, so I'm probably going a little overboard in my rants againts guns and gun culture down there.

Secondly, there actually is a ton of outrage at drunk driving and constant cries for tougher laws. Especially here in Alberta, we had tons of cries for tougher penalties for drunk drivers. Although, here they decided to get tougher on not drunk drivers, and try to pass it off as dealing with the drunk drivers who are actually out there getting bombed and driving, thank you very much Allison Redford.

But in a lot of places in the States (feel free to bring me up to speed, as you likely know more) I believe they have got a lot tougher on drunk driving. I know I've seen some commercials on American channel feeds warning of new laws where you lose your licence for years, and even for life in some cases if you're caught drinking and driving.

So I disagree, that there isn't cries for tougher drunk driving laws and American State governments spending money and time on new laws.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Is there actually anyone in here advocating a total ban on guns?

Not that I've seen. I know some Americans are expressing frustration at Canadians who are trying to come up with solutions, and I can definitly respect that, as most of us have never lived down there, and yet we're making judgements and proclamations about what will and won't work.

But what's frustrating as a Canadian, is that there seems to be a common theme from Americans in regards to gun debates. They seem very defensive at the idea of gun control, and very quick to try and discredit any ideas that involve guns being taken away or sales limited.

I keep seeing posts like "Did I say I'm against gun control?" or "No, I'm definitly open to it, but I highly doubt anything's going to work" etc. But when pressed for what they would do, they mostly deflect away from the question, and in reality don't seem to be open to anything that limits the average American's ability to own/purchase firearms.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Is there actually anyone in here advocating a total ban on guns?

Would any city dwellers miss them if they were?

Why not implement a secure out-of- city lockbox system? You can retrieve it anytime you want, but it is now logged that you picked it up, and have some intention to use it for whatever reason. It also provides a bit of a cooling off time, since you dont have immediate access, and knowing that somebody else knows that you took it out may give some people pause.

Maybe some people would cry Big Brother, but who cares? I bet when people are stopped at a border crossing and asked where they're going, they don't say, "none of your damned business!".

[Azure]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Something, anything. The US just has to start doing something.

I hate this opinion.

The September 11th attacks and the subsequent two wars that followed along with the Patriot Act should teach us that responding to incidents with legislation that just 'DOES SOMETHING!!' is pretty effing ridiculous.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Azure

I hate this opinion.

The September 11th attacks and the subsequent two wars that followed along with the Patriot Act should teach us that responding to incidents with legislation that just 'DOES SOMETHING!!' is pretty effing ridiculous.

I don't mean they should literally say "Let's pass legislation that does something, anything". I mean, we need to start somewhere, and curbing the gun culture and making guns harder to aquire/access is a start.

[puckluck2]

If changing the gun cultire in the U.S only takes 100 years I'd say that would be a success.

Let's start now.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

None, but the only country that ever tried to ban it found that had more negatives in the end and gave up, what we do with alcohol though is massively regulate it to minimise the negatives.

Unlike alcohol, when countries get rid of guns (the UK Australia Canada to a lesser degree) the bans are very effective, there being no way to 'home brew' guns

Massively regulate it? Tell that to the family of the 5 people Daniel Tchetter killed last year because he was intoxicated. Or to the families of thousands upon thousands of other people who were killed become someone drank to much and got behind the wheel.

If you honestly believe that the 10,000+ people that are killed by firearms each year in the US justifies an outright ban on ALL firearms, then the 18,000 so people that are killed in drinking and driving accidents, and the 275,000 that are injured justify a complete and outright ban on alcohol. If we're really serious about saving the future lives of completely random and helpless people, an outright ban is the only way going forward.

It is especially scary, because even as Canadians we cannot do anything to protect ourselves. We have no control over the dumbass who drinks too much at the company Christmas Party and decides he can drive home.

Of course, considering we've been through prohibition before, I would think as a society we've become smart enough to realize that you can't OUTRIGHT ban anything and be successful at it. Instead, you can educate your children to the best of your abilities, and even then thousands of morons drink and drive and kill innocent people.

Alcohol is regulated. But I do recall walking into the local beer mart at 16 years of age and buying a 24 without even having to present identification. Recipe for disaster? Absolutely, considering one of my classmates was killed in a drinking and driving accident.

Over the past two weeks one thing has become pretty obvious. People who understand absolutely nothing about firearms are those calling for outright bans. Or they call for outright bans on buying bullets, which bothering to take the time to even research what is behind making a 'bullet.' Those that own firearms, at least in this thread, for the most part agree with stricter regulation. Canada has pretty strict regulation. I know lots of firearm owners, and none of them own a handgun or assault rifle. If they laws weren't as strict, I'm pretty sure they would own numerous different models. And as a Canadian I have no problem with that. There are millions of firearms in Canada, and we don't have mass shootings on a weekly basis. We can also buy hollow point ammunition. Shocking, I know.

Interestingly enough, it is legal in Canada to own a semi-automatic .22 LR with a 30 round magazine. And a .22 handgun was used by the Virginia Tech shooter.

I also know many Americans that have CCW permits, and some of them are completely outraged over how the NRA has responded to the issue. When I ask them why they carry a concealed weapon, the answer is always for self protection. Yes, as a Canadian that concept is pretty foreign to me, considering I have never personally seen a traffic accident happen much less be the target of a crime, but to some people it is a problem.

I would also like to see some hard data on concealed carry. From what I've read, homicide and violent crime rates in the US are approaching 'historic lows.' And yet 41 states now allow concealed carry. So as crazy as the idea of a civilian carrying a firearm at all times(wild west!) seems to those of us who have never ever even considered it, as my American friends who do carry say, there is no direct link in concealed carry leading to more violence, or as many like to think of it as, 'crazy Americans running around with guns in public'....hasn't exactly led to an increase in gun violence.

There are also some encouraging statistics. Overall, less Americans own guns, so something is going in the right direction. I'm not sure what 2012 has done to the numbers, but the statistics gathered from 1990-2010 led to the conclusion that it was pretty rare chance that as a student, you would involved in a school shooting. Of course, it only takes one to make that stat useless, but overall it seemed to trend in the right direction.

There are also other issues at play here in the overall scheme of 'gun violence.' The US has a crappy social net, whereas countries like Canada and others do more to take care of our lower class. Healthcare is the first big one. And there have been studies shown that proper welfare services do more to curb crime, including gun crime, than ANY 'tough on crime' legislation does. I know Flash is going to come along and claim that I said the US can't afford to provide healthcare to its citizens, which at best is completely taking anything I have ever said on the subject out of context. In its current form, the US healthcare system spends more per capita than anyone else in the world, so using that healthcare system to provide healthcare for all its citizens would almost certainly drive spending to historic highs. Which just goes back to the original idea of fixing the welfare system to begin with.

Americans seem oblivious to that though, much like the Conservative Party here in Canada is oblivious to the numbers on 'tough on crime' laws, and how they don't help in the least bit.

I support strict assault weapon regulations. I think if you want to own an assault rifle, there should be some pretty serious checks, tests and training involved.

I also like waiting periods, buy back programs....and most of all, educational programs to help at risk youth perhaps not become so at risk.

There are a variety of different ways to tackle the issue. Just doing something will solve nothing. Of course, given the history of how the US government responds to serious incidents, I would not be surprised if they just come up with gun control legislation for the sake of coming up with something, and 10 years from now people will realize how completely useless it was.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Sorry if this has been posted before...I saw this on Facebook (and am assuming these are all true). I wonder what the NRA would say to these:

-Columbine had an armed guard
-Virginia Tech had its own police department
-Fort Hood is an army base

Three cases where an armed enforcer was present...and didn't have much impact.