Toosmartforyou: Seems to me that if the teacher who tried to intervene (a
former military man) WAS armed, we would not be reading about these deaths.
Instead, all he could do was run over to the shooter and try to disarm him using
words. Words did not work. How about if the teacher were armed with a stun
gun, which doesn't kill but disables. Now there's a real solution for
Responsible gun ownership means keeping your weapons so a 7th grader can't
get the weapon. Those who advocate gun ownership rights but come to realize
that with freedom and rights come responsibility. I want to know how and where
a 13 year-old gets a gun.
@toosmartforyouA fair question, but one that is incredibly difficult
to answer given the complexities surrounding the many issues that contribute to
social problems.When looking for solutions to complex social issues,
it's difficult to cogently address in a word restricted post. It's
worth mentioning, however, that some social scientists argue there is a
correlation between increased social problems and the reduction in cultural
values. They believe that a sustainable societal value system assists in
maintaining social order. I personally believe that economic
prosperity contributes to the reduction in social problems. Perhaps a
collaborative effort where players from across the spectrum of business,
government, philanthropy, and community based organizations converge to come up
with responsible solutions to social issues is a better alternative for solving
societal problems over an exclusive government option.One thing is
for certain...more gun laws advocated by thoughtless activists willing to
exploit a crisis probably won't solve the problem...it fails to address the
issue of why people commit crimes in the first place. In this respect, gun
rights supporters are correct in their assumption that more gun laws usually
only affect those who already obey the law.
how does a middle school child get ahold of a gun? I sincerely hope his parents
are detained and questioned. And if it was their gun, jailed.
@Weber State Graduate"Reasonable gun rights advocates don't
necessarily want a gun for "everyone and anyone." "Reasonable people don't advocate for people on the terrorist watch list
being allowed to have guns, but here we are with that very policy being chosen
by Jersey.@procuradorfiscalStatistically, people are more
likely to be shot by a gun if they live in a home with a gun. Why would we want
to export that to schools?@TatorsThe US would not have one of
the highest homicide rates in the industrialized world if your claims were
WSU GraduateThanks for your thoughts. I am still left
to wonder how we successfully address the issue. I agree that there are not
sufficient methods to detect and treat the mentally ill, and our obsession with
everything "newsworthy" being given exorbitant press coverage, it likely
promotes these horrific events and glamorizes them such that they seem to
attract the unstable to copy-cat them.Thinking that Washington will
produce a solution is laughable, too, since they can't handle the most
basic of problems and this one is far from basic. It simply isn't "all
guns" or "no guns." However that is all we hear when the subject is
broached, unfortunately.Do you have specific suggestions? I'd
like to consider them if you happen to be willing to share.
Re: "2 dead, 2 boys hurt in Nevada school shooting"Just
another in a long, long list of examples of politically-correct gun controls
disarming the good guys, making schools a more murder-friendly free-fire zone
for the bad guys.A teacher here, just as in Sandy Hook, had the will
and courage to protect the students who were killed, but was denied, by deranged
federal gun-free school zones law, the tools necessary to do so.Why
do liberals hate kids?
"...what has happened in the last decade or so since Columbine to our
schools, theaters and shopping malls?"The answer may well
involve social problems that gun control advocates fail to address. It's
much easier to take the human dynamic out of the gun control debate and simply
focus exclusively on the unassuming restriction of an inanimate object.
Reasonable gun rights advocates don't necessarily want a gun for
"everyone and anyone." Rather, many seek to remove the histrionics,
emotion, and hyperboles promoted by the gun control crowd and promote a
thoughtful conversation on the social ills that might encourage a person to even
think of committing these horrific crimes in the first place.The
answer will not come from political hacks in Washington willing to capitalize
and exploit a tragedy...that certainly "isn't the answer" either.
Gun control has never been about keeping guns from the hands of legal citizens
who are responsible. Never. They have always been about keeping guns out of
the hands of criminals, those mentally ill, and those who will not keep them
secure from children, adolescents or unstable members of their own family.I am all for guns being owned by responsible persons.....because they
ARE responsible.But the rub is, what has happened in the last decade
or so since Columbine to our schools, theaters and shopping malls? Why
isn't our system, currently in place, working to curb such violence? What
would be the best solution? (Giving a gun to everyone and anyone isn't the
@Chris b I am with alt to a point. If you are going to talk about
things like cars then lets talk about how strictly we regulate cars. Cars unlike
guns have a purpose beyond killing. Even though it may not sound like it I
support gun rights but your logic undermines the fight not support it
Of course logic and clear thinking suggests the inanimate object is always the
culprit...just like pencils misspell words, cars drive drunk, stoves burn
people, hammers smash thumbs, and spoons make people fat.
@ alt34:Why is it so hard to understand that people who commit such
crimes are criminals... criminals who pay absolutely no attention to such things
as more gun laws. More such laws absolutely would NOT have prevented this or any
similar atrocities involving guns. There has never been any substantiated
evidence to the contrary. Piling on additional gun legislation would do
nothing more than serve as some sort of feel good reaction by liberals who
don't know what else to do. Instead, they would only burden law abiding gun
owners rather than stop would-be perpetrators. Even in countries
where gun ownership is very strictly controlled and often forbidden, most
liberal politicians still don't understand why crime goes up afterward.
Nevertheless, that's what usually happens. Fewer guns in the hands of law
abiding citizens equals easier victims who have less means of fighting back
against criminals who know they benefit from such laws. Add to that
the fact that there are already over 100,000,000 privately owned guns in the
U.S., means there would be a never-ending black market... even if guns were
outright outlawed. Let common sense prevail.
@Chris BAt least with cars we require registration and training.
atl134,Cars going over 10 miles per hours kill significantly more
people than guns.We should get together and eliminate all cars that
go faster than 10 miles per hour. That would prevent more deaths than any gun
We should probably do something about this. Oh wait, it was gun violence? Oh
then nevermind, let's just do nothing and feign outrage a month or so later
when it happens again. (There, I just summed up a couple days worth
of CSPAN coverage).