Given the violent history of this guy, WHY was he still able to possess that
weapon?But I can hear it now. If that five year old had been able
to carry a gun to defend himself, this would never have happened.(I
know that's nonsense, but it makes as much sense as most other NRA ideas.)
The reporter botched the lede. It should read, "An individual arms-bearing
member of the free-state-securing militia holed up in a bunker with a 6-year-old
hostage kept law officers at bay Wednesday in an all-night, all-day standoff
that began when he killed a school bus driver and dragged the boy away,
3grandslams: Only assault-type weapons and high-capacity clips, that's it.
No one is taking away or even recommended taking away all guns, so don't
make it sound that way. Either way, the kids wouldn't have been armed -
unless you feel these kindergartners should be armed - which left only the bus
driver to be armed. I doubt the 65-year-old bus driver would have been ready
and able to deter this surprise attack by this person. You also assume in your
post that everyone wants to carry a gun, which is absolutely not the case. And
it certainly sounds like this bus driver was not the type of person who would
want to carry a gun. Our whole cultural mentality needs to change as far as
guns are concerned for these kinds of events to go away, armed or not.
Unfortunately, I don't see that happening in the near future.
@ 3grand: Considering all the threats this man had made and aggression he had
shown, the solution would have been to take his gun away.
So we got crazies like this guy and we want to ban guns why? So more crazies can
kill innoccent DEFENSELESS people.