ya know, kat, you are really starting to show that you don't know what you are talking about. Does the thought occur to you that someone who is so despondent and unbalanced that they are going to take their life, will do so anyhow? Did the gun make this student kill him/herself? No, it did not. Does the thought occur to you that the kid would have thrown him/herself in front of a car, jumped off a bridge, or overdosed? I think if I were you, I would be more angry at parents who drive their children to this, instead of using these victims to try and prop up your biases about weapons. As I said to Bill, I will say to you. I can match each of your horror stories with a positive story. People who are out of their depth and don't have facts to back up their positions use these tactics. You would be better off just saying you don't like guns and wish they were gone. That would be fine. But I give cites as to what I am saying. Those of you who know me, know that if I thought gun control would save the lives of these innocents, I would advocate and act to make it happen. But the evidence and experience does not show that.

Until you and others stop using these individual stories to appeal to popular prejudices (which is what demagogues do, look it up)you will be on the losing end of the argument. It is why Americans overwhelmingly support the right to own firearms.

One of the sad parts of this debate is that by the anti gun people taking such a polarizing position (unlike what Bill D has said elsewhere) it hinders the ability to make progress in certain areas that might make sense. For example: I support liberal conceal carry laws. But I feel that the training component should be much more rigorous. If one is going to carry a weapon in public places, the training ought be what police officers go through.

There is much dialogue that could happen, but not as long as the anti gun forces advocate against law abiding citizens, and the rights they have had for generations.

Mick