BS: Shooting tragedies and guns

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: gnu
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:41 PM

Back briefly on techical points. Re don : "forensic checks on a slug" (or csasing). Easy to modify the footprint(s) before and after a crime. Casing are a little harder and require more than simple hand tools. Don't ask - I ain't tellin.

Second point. Yes, semi-autos are easily modified to fire on full auto, as stated many times herein. But, if there is no law restricting mags ("clips" do not include all mags) to five rounds, outlawing gas powered repeaters is useless. I can (could when I did) fire a repeater lever action and pump action AND a bolt action if it's sloppy like a Mauser (got one and it's FAST!)accurately at 3 second intervals, at distance and on fast moving four legged animals. This discussion is not about distance and not about fast moving four legged animals which run MUCH differently than two legged animals. I can (could) knock down what I was shooting at every three seconds without a semi which STILL takes three seconds on accounta that is what takes to aim! Mabey some can do it in less time but that ain't yer average shotter.

Sorry if that is kinda graphic under the "circumstances" but I find compelled to explain the details to ensure people who advocate gun laws understand these technical points because, as I HOPE I have explained, these technical points make a BIG difference when enacting GOOD gun laws. Common sense, informed decisions HAVE to be part of it.

BTW, 9, one of the largest bears ever taken was taken with a 22. But it's easy to be accurate if you can touch it with the barrel.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:42 PM

Because, Dan, many feel certain arguments and claims are either not factually correct or are logically flawed. PDQ, for example, continues to ignore the fact that I and others HAVE agreed that some ownership of guns is BOTH allowed AND defensible. And your own reasoning about sports cars is 'correct', but irrelevant. Sports cars have other purposes than going very fast.... and their uses on highways is much more watched and regulated than guns are. One can have their license to drive revoked for a few speeding tickets.... and 'usually', speeding does not kill anyone, whereas firing a weapon outside a legal range is often/usually done with the purpose of injuring others!

OF COURSE weapons at home can and should be 'secured', but you KNOW how often they aren't! Those who insist they should be allowed firearms for 'self-defense in the home usually feel that a gun is of little use if they have to unlock a case or closet and load it before 'defending' their home.
There is not enough space on the newspaper's front page for the weekly stories of kids who knew where Dad...(or, sadly, Mom) keeps their guns! A few years ago, my ex-neighbor across the street bragged to me that he had a gun 'available' in every room of the house. He had two girls living at home at that time...under 12.

I will repeat this as long as others keep claiming that 'safety and enforcement' are all that are required.
"As long as a wide range of firearms are allowed to be kept in the home by average citizens, there will continue to be tragedies following burglaries and kids getting a hold of them!"
You simply cannot base the rules and logic on what YOUR abilities and practices tells you are reasonable. YOU will take care....too many others will not!

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:00 PM

Most people over estimate their own abilities. while at the same time under estimating the abilities of others.
I wonder how many people's last words were, "I can take him anytime"

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:02 PM

"Or a jug of bleach and a jug of ammonia to make nerve gas."

That doesn't produce a nerve agent I don't think, Henry. Lung irritant, and it can cause a person to die from asphyxiation. Of course, my memory ain't what it used to be--and likely never was.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:02 PM

"keys to the car"    We are to imply from this that Mr. Krinkle thinks gun owners, by keeping all their guns, could have deterred George W. Bush from idiocy, it seems.

And just how do you envision doing this, Mr. Krinkle?

Were you and the rest of the "well-regulated militia" going to kidnap Mr. Bush?

It seems you've been reading too much Robert Ludlum.

Why don't you try reading some history, so you might just possibly have somewhat of a chance of making sense, for a change? And start with some books about the US, 1783 to 1800.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: voyager
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:17 PM

A few comments/observations on this latest episode of senseless violence, innocent murder, gun control opinions, etc....

"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members"
   Mahatman Gandhi

Violence is as American as Cherry Pie
   H. Rap Brown/Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin

A Guide to Mass Shootings in America - Mother Jones

First we will cry and then we will act.

voyager

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:22 PM

Why do Americans want to go out shooting bears?? Unless attacked by one and in great danger, it's a wicked and senseless thing to do. Such huge and beautiful wild animals should be observed, photographed and left in peace to live their lives. Killing, killing, so strange and incomprehensible to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:23 PM

I don't have time for silly Amerikan history.
I'd rather research the history of capital punishment.
=(:-( ))

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:28 PM

I was misunderstood.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:41 PM

I don't want to shoot bears, Eliza. I don't want to shoot any living thing.
Unless I have no other choice.
I'd shoot the coyotes if I could get paid for it, though.
=(:-( ))

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Charmion
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:58 PM

Eliza, bears that hang around human settlements -- knwn here as "garbage bears" because they ransack garbage bins as they hunt for food -- are sufficiently dangerous that they are usually shot when it is establshed that they cannot be successfully relocated.

I agree that hunting bears for sport seems wrong, but even here in Ottawa I have met a fair few people who have had scary experiences with bears.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:04 PM

I live in Rural Maine. Have all my life (up to this point)I've never seen a Bear in the wild, and I've never had any desire to kill one.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: CET
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:07 PM

": RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,Lighter - PM
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:59 AM

How many times in real life has an armed intruder, bent on mass murder, been taken out by an armed civilian (or even a police officer) before he could kill anybody?

I'll rephrase that. How many times does it even *appear* that a hero has prevented a mass killing by drawing down faster than the heat-packin' bad guy?

Or even managed to *cut short* a shooting spree by nailing the gunman when he wasn't looking?

Come on, guys. How many?"

Well, here's a few that come to mind:

The Fort Hood shooting. Maj Nidal was shot and put out of action by a Military Police woman.

The Dawson College shooting in Montreal. The first cops on the scene went in immediately instead of waiting. My recollection is that the shooter killed himself when the police arrived. I don't think he was in the act of killing people when the police burst in but the point is that the police were on the scene, armed and prepared to shoot him.

Newtown, Connecticut. The police response seems to have been very rapid and according to accounts I have read, Lanza killed himself whe he heard the police nearby, and he had enough ammunition to kill every student in the school. Once again, armed intervention by the police saved lives.

Now if the Guest's point is that there is no recorded instance of a pistol-packing civilian preventing a mass murder by killing the bad guy, he might have a point. I would certainly like to hear about any cases where it did happen. However, he didn't limit his comment to civilians. He specifically mentioned "even a police officer", as if armed intervention by trained and determined people can do no good, which is patent nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:22 PM

Charles Whitman of the "Texas Tower" shootings, was 'eventually' shot by police & citizens after a long, extended effort to get to him... they 'may' have saved a few, though most people were well-hidden by the time they got to him.

Th 19 year old kid in the Wichita Holiday Inn shooting that I mentioned earlier (very similar to the Texas Tower thing) was also eventually shot & captured after police managed to get to the room beside the room where he was.,,,he 'only' killed 3 and injured 8.

That one, BTW, is missing from this list... which may list only 4 or more deaths)

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:31 PM

More on the use of guns to prevent crime...

                                                                                                                      here

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:50 PM

If you listen to birther/NRA/tin foil nation that private ownership of guns saves then trillion people every day...

They cannot substantiate any of their numbers de joir other than use each other as, ahhhhh, their sources/references...

These people, some here, must think that people are absolutely syupid to believe the utter their bullshit...

In New York City, for instance, where there is strict gun control the per capital murder ate is way the heck under any large Southern city with nothing in the way of gun control...

I mean, it is beyond futile trying to have a conversation when people won't use truth but lies put out by the NRA which makes lot$ of money on gun$ and gun $ale$...

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:57 PM

"I don't have time for silly.."   

That is, no time to actually learn something about one of your favorite topics to drivel on about.    Or, more succinctly:   "Don't bother me with facts--or even ask me to get the facts."

Why are we not surprised?

It's only a shame that your attitude is widespread--and that you and your fellow intellectual giants vote.    (But of course maybe we're lucky enough that you don't vote).

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:05 PM

Here in southeast Alaska I have seen many bears and had close encounters with several. This is bear country; given spawning salmon, ripened berries, forest all around and many freshwater streams running through it, it is up to humans to stay alert. Garbage bears, as Charmion implied, are the worst because humans have habituated bears to easy sustenance.

Juneau passed new ordinances a few years ago to address the problem; it is against the law now to not use bear-resistant containers and dumpsters. Offenders pay stiff fines. We do pretty well now, much better than in previous years. I remember one year when 14 bears were shot by Fish and Wildlife management. These days officials dart them, collar them and haul them out-the-road away from civilisation. If or when they come back, they are shot.

I realize this is way off-subject. Suffice to say that there are many hunters locally- I don't know what their instruments of choice are.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:09 PM

Everyone knows I voted Green.
=(:-( P)

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: pdq
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:17 PM

"Garbage bears...are the worst because humans have habituated bears to easy sustenance."

My, my. The ursine welfare state.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:26 PM

If an armed civilian (and I'm talking genuine civilian, not off-duty cop or out-of-uniform military) tries to take out a well armed shooter, there are four possible outcomes:

1) He's successful.

2) The shooter specifically targets him because he has a gun and, thus, poses a greater threat to the shooter than anyone else in the room.

3) When police arrive, they see he's armed and shoot him, thinking he's one of the bad guys.

4) He misses the shooter and harms or kills an innocent person.

If I were a betting man and had a choice of putting $1,000 on Mr. Armed Civilian being a hero against a mass murderer and the Chicago Cubs winning the World Series, I'd go with the Cubs.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:32 PM

Two more thoughts...

Last year, before the elections, Wayne LaPierre of the NRA was quoted (and recorded) as asserting that Obama & his administration were "corrupt" and "Liars" who were 'seeking to take away all guns'... why? He didn't offer specific details, but seemed to simply want to hang that label on Obama because he was a Democrat and hadn't bought the full NRA line of BS.

also.... gun shows. Lots of people, including gun defenders agree the loopholes are too wide, but I was just thinking: These dealers AT gun shows, and those who sell online.... where do THEY get their stocks of weapons? I assume THEY have to licensed and have valid permits to sell the guns TO people at shows. How are those permits allocated and monitored? Even further... how are importers and stateside manufacturers monitored and regulated? There is a complex system going on to allow multi-millions of weapons of many kinds to flow into dangerous paths.... what are the details?

I can do some research, but if anyone has **clear** knowlege, tell me.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:38 PM

Back in the holler in Virgina there was this ol' boy who was about 6'10" and rough as a night in jail and he came up and told me that the former owner allowed him to hunt back in the forest so, hey, me being a purdy tough 6 ft. lightweight said, "Okay"...

The guy always gave me the creeps until one day he came outta the woods with a 150 pound bear which really pissed me off so I told him that I didn't appreciate him shootin' bears and that he couldn't come back...

For a several seconds I'll admit that I thought that he was either going to shoot me punch on me... He did neither and never came back to the farm to hunt...

I mean, there are times when ypou might have to shoot a bear but don't go hunting them...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:40 PM

Probably buy them from the federal government. The Mexican drug cartels do.
=(:-( ))

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:52 PM

"Why do Americans want to go out shooting bears??"

Sometimes it's so they can 'bag a trophy'. Other times it's mostly to render the fat. The hide is a bonus, and the meat will feed sled dogs and people if there's not much whitefish or deer-type creatures. Just in case that was a serious question.

In some places, whole communities depend on either rivers--which aren't worth much in day-to-day terms when they're frozen--or barges (need rivers) or planes. Slice it whichever way, and food that isn't hunted and killed is expensive. I lived 'there' for two years, and when tomatoes were selling about four for a dollar down south, they cost a buck a piece up north. Same goes for apples, oranges, bananas, etc. Meat at the Northern Store cost $30-$50 for a small roast, and 2-3 pound chickens were $15-$20 bucks. The inexpensive time which lasted for about three months was when there were winter roads. (That's another story.)

Yes, it's easy to go to the supermarket--and much more pleasant because someone else killed supper for us--but I'll tell you, that costs big time.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:05 PM

More and more people are going to become hunters.
By necessity.
=(:-( ))

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:16 PM

Fine... Kill deer and boars... Lot's of them... They are pests and edible... Plus, they are over-populated...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:20 PM

Bill
responsible gun owners that are concerned about home invasion still have their weapons secure. First thing, have a nervous little dog. Second if you are going to own a weapon for such purpose, get a gun safe. They have a combo key, you type in the numbers and wham there is your firearm. No kid is going to open it if it is a good one

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: olddude
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:30 PM

and a really good gun safe is not just a combo, there is a trick to the numbers they are made kid proof but you can have a weapon ready about as fast as getting it out of a drawer if one needs that level of security.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:54 PM

Give up, Ol'ster... Everyone is convinced that you are a responsible capable gun owner...

You ain't the problem... I doubt seriously if you need an AR15 or 30 round clips to defend yourself...

But alot of folks out there think they do... They are the problem... And guess what else they believe??? They believe that the government is coming to kill them and that Obama wasn't born in the US... These are the people buying the shit... And these people aren't, exactly, responsible adults...

These are the folks we are talkin' about here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Songwronger
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:56 PM

Since someone quoted Gandhi earlier, here are some more Gandhi quotes:

"He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully." – M.K. Gandhi, Between Cowardice and Violence

"I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence." – M.K. Gandhi, The Doctrine of the Sword.

"When my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence." – M.K. Gandhi, The Doctrine of the Sword.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:17 PM

Gandhi was talking about personal self defense... Every person who has ever spent any time in a dojo understands that concept... BTW, I disagree with Gandhi's thought that in defending yourself that you are practicing violence... Violence is force "above" that needed for self defense... I was taught to use only the minimum force to defend yourself...

Either way, Gandhi wasn't into packin' heat...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Songwronger
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:26 PM

Far out. Enlighten us some more with your unique insights into the mind of Gandhi. You are just so freakin awsome. Must be the dope you smoke. You know, the stuff that your boy Eric Holder runs guns into Mexico so the cartels can ship it to you. So what if a few thousand have to die along the border in violent...I mean "forceful" incidents.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:37 PM

"...but you can have a weapon ready about as fast as getting it out of a drawer if one needs that level of security."

Needs? If one actually needs that level of security, where do you keep the safe? One in every room like my ex-neighbor?...beside the TV... by the refrigerator? Tapping in numbers takes time...not to mention the time to evaluate whether you need to open it, Rep. Gohmert of Texas wishes that teacher had a gun... I wonder how long it would take a teacher to go to a safe, tap a few 'easy' numbers and get a hand gun to confront a kid with an AR-15... who has already fired 20-30 rounds.

How many stories can you find of ANYONE who has, with a quickly accessed weapon, successfully protected their home against actual (not 'imagined') danger? I will bet that there are MORE stories of sad mistakes by nervous homeowners.

I'm sorry, Dan... I do understand the IDEA of securing & protecting one's home, but 99% of the time it is just a slogan ABOUT fear & danger, rather than a genuine ongoing need that moves people. And **IF** they can justify having a gun IN the house, ready in the safe, what do they do when they open the door and/or leave the house? Now we are into carry permits and training and similar questions about response time when a possible threat is identified... etc..etc...

Since VERY few people actually have occasion to make defenses at home... or even walking down the street.. they have little to guide them except their imagination about what to do in a real situation. Practical, daily, reality in gun use is for police and SERIOUSLY trained people...YOU might be one, and I might approve YOU if I were in charge, but the issue is the thousands to millions who 'just sorta wish' they felt safer.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:55 PM

Just saw an interview with Jeffrey Toobin...senior analyst with CNN about the history of interpreting 2nd amendment.

short version: "The courts had found that the first part, the "militia clause," trumped the second part, the "bear arms" clause. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms—but did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon."

Then, in just 2008, the 5-4 divided Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Hellerruled for the 1st time specifically about individuals rights as to guns.

Guess which justices were the 5?

So, as I posted earlier... and in case you paid it no attention... it was a VOTE by a politically biased few conservatives, pressured by many more of the same, which puts us in this awkward place today.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 10:58 PM

their ability to tackle problems with cheerfulness and determination'

But not it has seemed when it comes to this subject. Perhaps things might change now. It is always a good idea to be hopeful, whatever the odds.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 05:24 AM

The thing that's getting shot with monotonous regularity on this thread, is the breeze.
Nobody's really listening to anybody else, most are spouting second hand facts, and others have got the use of a non sequitur down to a fine art.
FFS, would someone say something constructive, for a change!
Sorry to the few who are talking sense, but you're outnumbered by eejits, by about 99 to 1

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Rob Naylor
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:07 AM

How many stories can you find of ANYONE who has, with a quickly accessed weapon, successfully protected their home against actual (not 'imagined') danger? I will bet that there are MORE stories of sad mistakes by nervous homeowners

I remember having a debate in the letters section of the London Evening Standard back in about 1994. It was about the routine arming of UK police. I pointed out that in that year, of 48,000 New York police officers, 43 had been killed or injured with firearms....but 26 of those were by negligent discharges of their own or colleagues' weapons.

Others argued that in the UK, since only a small proportion of police officers were firearms-trained, to a high standard, it was unlikely to be a problem. I believe that was the same week that 3 City of London police officers were wounded when their highly-trained colleague dropped his H&K MP5 onto the canteen table and it went off. I think that in that year, 5 UK police officers were injured by firearms...4 by their own or colleagues' negligent discharges.

This year has been unusual in that 3 UK police officers have been shot dead (half of all those shot dead in the last 15 years) by criminals. But it's also seen 3 officers wounded and 1 killed by their own or colleagues' negligent discharges.

If such a high proportion of firearms injuries to police officers, who are supposed to be trained to a much higher standard than members of the public would be, are the result of negligent discharges, I'd be absolutely astonished if ready access to weapons at home or in public saved even a fraction of the extra lives it *cost* in accidental shootings.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: gnu
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:37 AM

Moncton, NB Times&Transcipt today...

Positions shifting on gun control


Some U.S. Republicans say gun control should be debated, along with mental health issues

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON - Some Republicans now say they're willing to discuss the politically treacherous issue of gun control, along with mental health issues and violent video games, while President Barack Obama said he supports efforts in Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban in the wake of last week's Connecticut school shooting.

Republicans in the House of Representatives discussed the gun issue at their regular closed-door meeting yesterday, and at least some were willing to consider gun control as part of a solution to the kind of violence that killed 26 people, including 20 children six and seven years old.

The massacre, one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history, has rattled the usual national dialogue on guns in America, where public opinion had shifted against tougher gun control in recent years and the gun lobby is a powerful political force.

Obama has called for 'meaningful action' and met with Cabinet members Monday on how to respond. He has long supported reinstating the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004, but was quiet on the issue during his first term. Obama has said he believes the Constitution's Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said yesterday that Obama is 'actively supportive' of reinstating an assault weapons ban and would also support legislation to close the gun show 'loophole,' which allows people to buy guns from private dealers without background checks.

The president was not expected to take any formal action on guns before the end of the year, given the all-consuming efforts to resolve tax and deficit-reduction talks and nominate new Cabinet secretaries.

The most powerful supporter of gun owners, the National Rifle Association, broke its silence yesterday, four days after the school shoot­ing. After a self-imposed media blackout that left many wondering how it would respond to the killings, it said in a statement that its members were 'shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders.' The group also said it wanted to give families time to mourn before making its first public statements. The organization pledged 'to help to make sure this never happens again' and has scheduled a news conference for Friday.

As shares in publicly traded gun manufacturers were dropping for a third straight day yesterday, the largest firear ms maker in the United States said it is being put up for sale by its owner, which called last week's school shooting a 'watershed event' in the American debate over gun control.

Freedom Group International makes Bushmaster rifles, the weapons thought to have been used in Friday's killings.

The New York-based private equity group Cerberus Capital Management - which invests money on behalf of public employees like teachers, among other clients said it will sell its controlling stake in the company, while investors fled other firear ms makers.

After yesterday's meeting of Republicans, Congressman Jack Kingston said that nothing should be done immediately.

'Put guns on the table, also put video games on the table, put mental health on the table,' he said. 'There is a time for mourning and a time to sort it out.' Formerly pro-gun Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said 'a thoughtful debate about how to change laws' is coming soon. Republican Sen. Charles Grassley said Monday that the debate must include guns and mental health. And NRA member Sen. Joe Manchin, another Democrat, agreed it's time to begin an honest discussion about gun control and said he wasn't afraid of the political consequences.

It's too early to say what could emerge next year in Congress, but the comments are significant. Grassley is senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which probably would take the first action on any gun control legislation. Reid sets the Senate schedule. And Manchin defied the NRA while the politically powerful pro-gun group has remained silent since Friday's massacre.

At the state level, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder vetoed legislation that would have allowed concealed weapons in churches, schools and daycare centres. The Republican governor told The Associated Press Monday he was scrutinizing the bill after the massacre in Connecticut. He also drew on his own memories of a fatal shooting in his college dormitory more than three decades ago.

Snyder said in a release yesterday that public venues need clear legal authority to ban firear ms 'if they see fit to do so.' In California, proposed legislation would increase the restrictions on purchasing ammunition by requiring buyers to get a permit, undergo a background check and pay a fee.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Conference of Mayors wrote Obama and Congress calling for 'stronger gun laws, a reversal of the culture of violence in this country, a commission to examine violence in the nation, and more adequate funding for the mental health system.' Specifically, the mayors asked for: A ban on assault weapons and other high-capacity magazines, like those reportedly used in the school shooting.

Strengthening the national background check system for gun purchasers.

Strengthening the penalties for straw purchases of guns, in which legal buyers acquire weapons for other people.

Reid told the Senate, 'In the coming days and weeks, we will engage in a meaningful conversation and thoughtful debate about how to change laws and culture that allow violence to grow.' His comments mark a shift in his approach to the issue.

After a mass shooting in July at a Colorado theatre left 12 people dead, Reid said the Senate's schedule was too busy to have a debate on gun control.

And after 32 people were killed in 2007 at Virginia Tech, Reid cautioned against a 'rush to judgment' about new gun laws.

In 2010, top NRA official Wayne LaPierre called Reid 'a true champion' of gun rights.

Other Republicans said mental health, not guns, was the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:41 AM

'When I was on the job I got to fire a Thompson sub machine gun. I was not impressed.'

and the lady in question Kendall...? I bet it made an impression!

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:41 AM

Yeah, Bill... Let's keep in perspective that, as much as we don't like to admit it, is that the Supreme Court are politicians... Look at Scalia... He thinks he's a rock star... Goes around speaking to right winged groups sounding just like he's running for some office...

But never mind that...

The NRA narrative is shaping up to be blaming the ineffective mental health workers that are paid by your taxes!!! Horrors!!! Yup, whenever boxed in blame a government worker... Watch the way they fold this out...

I'm glad we are having that discussion as well but it's only a small part of the story but the NRA hopes it can create enough subterfuge to survive this latest push to slow down the proliferation of very dangerous weapons...

As for my knowledge of Gandhi and non-violence, Wrongman... I'd put my life's experiences up against yours in an over-all understanding of the non-violent movement and can guarantee you that Gandhi would have rephrased his thoughts if he knew that right winged whackos would one day use them against the spirit of his true beliefs...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: kendall
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 08:53 AM

Bill D..whwere do you keep it? In my pocket or on my night stand.

I raised three girls and not one of them ever touched my shot gun or rifle. I no longer have either weapon since I gave up hunting.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:08 AM

PeeDee- citing Andrew K. Dart's blog as a source? He's even more of a right-wing lunatic, liar and fanatic than you usually resort to.

Give us all a rest from the bullshit, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:11 AM

'Wrongman' isn't the name of the poster in question Bobert. I know we all tend to use altered names when we respond to posts, but in a long and busy thread like this it's not a bad idea to use the actual name they posted under so as to know what is under discussion.

As for Gandhi a much more appropriate comment for the present situation might be when, in response to a question as to what he thought of Modern Civilisation he replied that 'It would be a very good idea'

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:12 AM

BillD,

"These dealers AT gun shows, and those who sell online.... where do THEY get their stocks of weapons? I assume THEY have to licensed and have valid permits to sell the guns TO people at shows. How are those permits allocated and monitored?"

1. The FFL dealers at gun shows are required to comply with the same laws, checks, and paperwork that they have at their place of business.

2. Selling ONLINE requires delivery t, and handling by a FFL who is required to comply with the same laws, checks, and paperwork that they have at their place of business.


The " gun show exemption is ONLY for PRIVATE sales between individuals, who must comply with the legal requirements of their state- i.e., they are supposed to determine that the person is a resident of the same state, not a felon, of sound mental state, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:47 AM

Sorry, McG, but I don't have a clue who wrongman, songwronger or whom ever is... Lotta folks who have the most right winged views to spew hide behind stupid names so they don't have to stand behind their posting...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:52 AM

How can a bloke selling guns over the counter have any way of knowing that someone buying the gun is 'of sound mental state'.

The presumption ought to be that they are not unless there is solid proof that they are. And that is not an easy thing to prove for any of us. Just the fact they might never have been sectioned is nowhere near good enough. You'd need references from guaranteed sources at the very least.

As for online sales there is no way these can ever ensure an adequate level of proof.

It should be the same level of proof as there would be to allow someone to adopt a child.

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:01 AM

It's called "background checks"... Problem is that the data base is so out-dated that it is by in large ineffectual...

Then thrown in the gun show loophole and why even have the laws on the books...

BTW, the Republican Party has blocked every effort by Obama to allow the appointment of a head of ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms)... But that's just a sidebar here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:03 AM

"As for online sales there is no way these can ever ensure an adequate level of proof.
"


The online sales can only be FROM an FFL TO an FFL- the FFL puts his license on the line when he fils out the paperwork on the end customer. The FFL is responsible for the checks, and many states require confirmation by the police as well. Records are kept, and subject to government inspection at any time.


Many here are making demands for new laws that are ALREADY in place. If they have not stopped gun crimes, why do you think making more laws saying the same thing will do any good????

Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
From: GUEST,999
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:24 AM

The real question then is where do illegal guns come from. If they were ever legal to begin with how come the paper trail is so hard to determine? At some point they are laundered in order to become black market weapons, no?