What to do after Newtown

[MooseMom]

Let's continue the discussion here, OK?  Perhaps we should leave the other thread for those who want to solely express their grief.  Let's be respectful to those who do not want to enter/read any discussion about what we should/can do in the aftermath of what happened in Newtown.









EDITED: Topic moved to the Political Section - jbeany, Moderator bowing to the inevitable.... 

[Hemodoc]

Let's continue the discussion here, OK?  Perhaps we should leave the other thread for those who want to solely express their grief.  Let's be respectful to those who do not want to enter/read any discussion about what we should/can do in the aftermath of what happened in Newtown.

Sounds good Moosemom,

http://ihatedialysis.com/forum/index.php?topic=28031.100;topicseen

Dear Moosemom, we will have to wait and see how all of this turns out politically. One woman I went to college with won't be satisfied until we have gun confiscation in the US. Certainly, it appears that there will be a ban on high capacity ammo magazines. CA and other states already limit them to 10 and outlaw the 30 bullet magazines already. I have no problem with FFL required for all private sales since that is the system in CA already.

Those are certainly reasonable considerations, but how far will they go. Will they ban all "black rifles?" Will they ban all semi-automatic weapons?

There is one very simple fact, gun laws don't prevent criminals having guns, nor do they prevent these atrocities as Norway and Germany among others demonstrate. Will gun laws keep people from gaining access to illegal guns so declared? History says that the answer to that question is no.

The simple fact remains that the only way to approach monsters with guns already in action is to meet force with force. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. I can't imagine any law that will prevent the wrong people having access to guns. Nor does gun confiscation prevent murders as we have seen in Russia and other countries that have gone that route.

When I was in between my first and second year of medical school, a friend of mine got me a summer job at Boston State Mental Institution. Ironically, that is where my mother and father met. (Hang on, my mother was a nurse and my dad worked nights for room and board while he was going to grad school) That is closed now as are most inpatient mental hospitals.  All of these shooters in the most recent incidents of mass shootings were known at risk individuals where the system did not get them the treatment they needed, nor protect innocent lives from their madness.

How the politics of this tragedy settles will in many ways define how safe our children will be in the future. Will we focus on the mental health failures, or will they instead continue with the anti-gun agenda that we have long expected from the Obama regimen? Time will tell, but I am skeptical that the nation will enact true security measures for all which includes responsible gun ownership.

[Hemodoc]

Despite the constant terrorist threats, one aspect of the Israeli school security plans are selected members who carry concealed. These people are not identified. Massad Ayoob, a well know firearms and police expert believes we should immediately implement the same steps that they have in Israel, Peru and the Philippines which have essentially eliminated mass killings in their schools. Here is his commentary.

If I were a parent of a child in an elementary school, I would seriously consider what Mr. Ayoob proposed, namely having a trained, armed individual on patrol at the school, but I would NOT want that person to be my child's teacher.  That teacher would have to have a weapon loaded and easily accessible at all times, and to have that in a classroom of young children just does not strike me as safe. 

Perhaps, as had been an idea floated around, the National Guard can have a role here.

I do think that the parents of the children in schools should have a major input in whatever decisions are made.

Actually, I carry around my young grandchildren every day and they have no idea nor need to know that I do. Properly adhered to, concealed carry is not visible and it is safe. My wife prefers that I have my gun available wherever we go. I am in the process of moving from CA to Idaho since CA denies access to normal folks getting a permit in LA County.  Once again, I have  LOT of friends here in Idaho that carry on a daily basis. Done properly, it is safe an not noticed at all. In fact, my little grandchild has been on my lap with my gun inches from her while I do dialysis. She doesn't know it is there and is secured from her. Guns and safety are not separate issues.

In the upcoming political discussions, any decision that does not acknowledge the dangers of gun free zones as a target to these creeps will completely miss the underlying situation and root causes. The Aurora theatre was not the largest, nor closest to the shooter, but it was the only one the prohibited concealed carry. Is that just a coincidence? No, they seek places that prevent victims of shooting having the necessary force to respond immediately.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/13942-gun-free-zones-called-magnets-for-mass-shooters

As far as the national guard, no need to go to that extreme. Once again, there are some very simple things that can be done, essentially invisible to the kids that works well already in Peru, the Philippines and Israel, all with much worse trends in violence than the US. For some reason, I seriously doubt that what we will get will approach common sense security measures. I suspect will get anti-gun political posturing instead which will not fix the problem.

[noahvale]

*

[Hemodoc]

Moosemon quote from Newtown, CT thread
Reply #102 on: 12/19/12  07:04:50 PM » 

I don't know if you saw President Obama's news conference this morning, but this is exactly what he said/did, although he has appointed the Vice President himself to head it up.  The President talked about guns, mental health and the American culture of violence just as Mr. K did.  That these two would agree on such an emotive issue is a Christmas miracle in and of itself.  Maybe the deaths of these teachers and children will not have been in vain after all.  It is up to us as a society to give their deaths a meaning.  Amen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, this is what Dr. Krauthammer was afraid would happen - Obama trying to capitalize on the Sandy Hook tragedy to get firearm restrictions passed.   Appointing Biden - a gun control restrictions advocate going back to his years in the Senate - shows this is more about politics and an agenda than coming up with solid reccommendations to help solve/get a better understanding of the nature of mass shootings.   If not, why the rush to have legislation for Congress to vote on by the end of January?  Do you really feel six weeks of discussion is adequate for such a complicated, multi-layered issue that goes beyond gun control?

By the way, here are the results of a 12/18/12 Gallup Poll on the public view of how to prevent mass shootings at schools.  Banning the sale of assault and semiautomatic weapons was fourth on the list.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/159422/stop-shootings-americans-focus-police-mental-health.aspx

Interesting poll. The top two choices have the most potential on the list. Like I said, all of us gun owners understood what the reelection of Obama would mean for gun rights. The greatest danger is not what will happen politically with guns with this event, but instead what happens if the power balance in SCOTUS changes. The entire second amendment would face elimination. Unfortunately, our gun rights are on a limited time frame I am sure. The progressive agenda all over the world is to strip away gun rights and disarm the population. The promise of safety when that happens will never materialize, just the opposite will occur.

Sadly, not much we can do about those outcomes over time. People today seem to have no concept of freedom and what it entails any longer. Surrendering all of our rights to a larger and larger government is not a pretty way to go. Lawful possession of firearms by responsible people is not a threat to this nation. In fact, the founding fathers saw the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental element of freedom.

[Rerun]

I have a question.  If CT has some of the strictest gun laws then why did the mother have the automatic weapon?  I thought CT kept the ban on them.

She must have had them illegally?

[Hemodoc]

I have a question.  If CT has some of the strictest gun laws then why did the mother have the automatic weapon?  I thought CT kept the ban on them.

She must have had them illegally?

Thanks for the PM Rerun, you are the best.

This is not an automatic rifle, but instead semi-automatic. You must pull the trigger each time. Full automatic shoots multiple shots with one trigger pull. This is a common and popular rifle for hunting, target shooting and some have them for self defense purposes. The polymer "black rifles" are very popular in shooting competitions for accuracy.

Gun control fails due to the wrong premise, fewer guns equals less crime and less violence.  That is not what the history of gun control produces nor is it the findings of academic studies.

Israel prevents school terrorist actions through simple security measures. If we are really serious about protecting our children, then lets implement proper security precautions.

[jbeany]

I have a question.  If CT has some of the strictest gun laws then why did the mother have the automatic weapon?  I thought CT kept the ban on them.

She must have had them illegally?

This is not an automatic rifle, but instead semi-automatic. You must pull the trigger each time. Full automatic shoots multiple shots with one trigger pull. This is a common and popular rifle for hunting, target shooting and some have them for self defense purposes. The polymer "black rifles" are very popular in shooting competitions for accuracy.

It is pretty easy to acquire what you need to convert many semi-auto's to full auto though.  And it's dreadfully easy (and usually legal) for anyone reasonably competent with gun conversions to get a trigger kit that lets you "bump fire" - or quickly and repeatedly pull the trigger so it appears to be a full auto.  Same results on the other end of the gun, slightly harder on the shooter's trigger finger.  Combine with speed loaders and extended magazines, the results are similar to full auto - lots of damage in a very short span of time.

[gothiclovemonkey]

saw this on FB, I thought some of you may find this interesting.

http://shortlittlerebel.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/urgent-update-on-connecticut-shooting/

[Rerun]

I couldn't read the whole article but that is complete bullshit.  In the beginning it was just bad reporting and greed to get the first snippet of information.  There are 2 survivors in the hospital that will talk when ready.  I hope they are being protected from the rude and vial media.  I'm sure if they would have warned all the media they should not see this horrific scene.... and opened the door.... they would have trampled each other to get the first pictures!  My God!  There are conspiracy theorist that think our government took down the trade towers.  Now, our government killed kids to get gun laws changed.  I don't believe either.

Hemodoc, thank you for explaining the one trigger pull for automatic and each trigger pull for semi automatic.  I had not put that together.

Jbeany.... You sound like you know too much information about guns.  You a packer?  Maybe I missed it if you said you were.

[KarenInWA]

I couldn't read the whole article but that is complete bullshit.  In the beginning it was just bad reporting and greed to get the first snippet of information.  There are 2 survivors in the hospital that will talk when ready.  I hope they are being protected from the rude and vial media.  I'm sure if they would have warned all the media they should not see this horrific scene.... and opened the door.... they would have trampled each other to get the first pictures!  My God!  There are conspiracy theorist that think our government took down the trade towers.  Now, our government killed kids to get gun laws changed.  I don't believe either.

I thought similar when I read it, too. From what I understand, the perp was not let in by anyone after he buzzed in, instead, he took the window down with force. I don't know if that was with the gun and bullets or something else. And yes, what Rerun said. This was a time of chaos, and information was coming all over from all kinds of ends. That is typical in a tragedy of this magnitude. Everyone wants to be the first, and when you think of the game of telephone we all played as kids, it's easy to see how how all of that information can get misconstrued. Of course, when you really stop and think about it, how can you trust anything that you read? It sucks, it really does.

I haven't had the time to check out the links on that article, so I may do that when I have more time. But, I also agree with Rerun about how those 2 witnesses in the hospital need to heal first before talking to the media. I just wish we weren't all having this discussion. I sometimes watch the Sunday politial shows that are on in the morning. As I watched them this last Sunday, all I could think was how much I wish they were just talking about the fiscal cliff instead. Just because that would mean that this wouldn't have happened, and those beautiful children and their teachers and staff would still all be here. I wish that "mother" had the intelligence and common sense to lock up those guns, and to not have ever taken her sick son to the gun range. We all wouldn't be mourning, and I put the full blame on her and her son.

KarenInWA

[Hemodoc]

I have a question.  If CT has some of the strictest gun laws then why did the mother have the automatic weapon?  I thought CT kept the ban on them.

She must have had them illegally?

This is not an automatic rifle, but instead semi-automatic. You must pull the trigger each time. Full automatic shoots multiple shots with one trigger pull. This is a common and popular rifle for hunting, target shooting and some have them for self defense purposes. The polymer "black rifles" are very popular in shooting competitions for accuracy.

It is pretty easy to acquire what you need to convert many semi-auto's to full auto though.  And it's dreadfully easy (and usually legal) for anyone reasonably competent with gun conversions to get a trigger kit that lets you "bump fire" - or quickly and repeatedly pull the trigger so it appears to be a full auto.  Same results on the other end of the gun, slightly harder on the shooter's trigger finger.  Combine with speed loaders and extended magazines, the results are similar to full auto - lots of damage in a very short span of time.

Only a criminal would do such a task and most the gang bangers don't have that type of knowledge.  It is NOT legal at all to modify any weapon in that manner and I don't know anyone who has done such a thing.  In addition, the M-16 used by the military has a 3 round burst since you really can't accurately shoot full auto with any accuracy beyond a very short burst.

People can legally own full auto machine guns with an incredible amount of red tape and applications in a limited number of states. Not many folks go through the required permitting process to own a full auto machine gun. Guns remain the most highly regulated commodity in America.

Guns of all types can shoot rapidly and be reloaded quickly even old fashioned revolvers.  World record holder Jerry Miculek makes a revolver sound like a machine gun shooting 12 shots in less than 3 seconds.  The entire semi-auto hysteria is just that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DpCellB_UQ

Gun control will not remove any of the old weapons in America nor do I believe they should. The only manner in which to remove guns from Americans is confiscation, once again something I would hate to see. Do we really want criminals and the government the only people with guns and law abiding citizens with no means of effective self defense? An assault weapon ban or semi-auto ban of the "black rifles" will not in any manner make American school kids any safer.

In addition, it will only increase the black market sales of these weapons used by criminals. I would remind everyone of the horrible nationwide gang problem we have that is venturing into another form of organized crime. Selling drugs and other criminal activities are supported by illegal firearm possession. What will happen to personal crime statistics if we severely restrict legal ownership to law abiding folks?  Will that make us safer?

Focussing on proven and relatively simply school security measures offers the best solution. Mass shootings were becoming very common in America's churches until many churches instituted their own private security "ministries." I know of one very large Baptist church that places active and retired law enforcement officers into a very coordinated security force with ear phones and the whole coordinated security detail you see with dignitaries. Churches are no longer the big targets for mass shootings as they were more than a decade ago. Most people in the church never notice these security precautions.

In 2007, one of those security details prevented a large loss of life when a gunman killed two people in an outside church parking lot and then entered the building with over a thousand rounds of ammo. Although heavily outgunned, the security person confronted and engaged the shooter. The shooter was wounded and then took his own life. The security team in most of these churches are unpaid volunteers.

http://blutube.policeone.com/police-training-videos/935831023001-jeanne-assam-and-the-new-life-church-shooting/

[willowtreewren]

Hemodoc,

I wish you would not use the term "gang bangers" in this discussion as it is obvious you are not aware of its meaning.

On another note, I find it extremely disconcerting (and sad) to be in a place mentally that we even consider it an option to have armed security personnel in schools.

And would this mean that ALL schools would need to be "armed" or folks with mental problems leading them toward violence would target those schools that weren't?

This sounds almost like an arms race. 

[Hemodoc]

Hemodoc,

I wish you would not use the term "gang bangers" in this discussion as it is obvious you are not aware of its meaning.

On another note, I find it extremely disconcerting (and sad) to be in a place mentally that we even consider it an option to have armed security personnel in schools.

And would this mean that ALL schools would need to be "armed" or folks with mental problems leading them toward violence would target those schools that weren't?

This sounds almost like an arms race. 

Dear Willowtree,

Sorry, I live among gang bangers so please don't presuppose that I don't understand their dangers. Up until about 4 years ago, we had an entire household of about 25 active drug dealers and gang bangers in a HUD home three doors down from my house, so I will simply correct your false allegation.  In addition, a close female relation was jumped into the crips gang at the age of 13 by four creeps she didn't know. We didn't find out about this until after she attempted suicide when she was 16 and she revealed it to us in a large group session that she had been gang raped and her "best friend" set up the encounter and enticed her to the place it occurred. Her saga continued but I think you get the picture.  I understand very well the many nuances of the moniker gang banger thank you.

I have no problem calling them gang bangers because that is exactly what they are and they destroy lives daily through their gang banging activities. It has affected me in very personal ways. In addition, my neighborhood in CA outside of LA has been plagued with smash and grab robberies by young teenage members of these gangs riding around on bikes with back packs. Enough said.

Secondly, most that support Obama that have little understanding of security issues believe that taking guns away from law abiding folks will solve the problem. That is magical thinking at its best.  Once again, other nations have had worse security issues in their schools and the first thing that they did was to make them gun zones, not gun free zones as in America.

Most of these school shootings are planned in advance sometimes over several months time such as Columbine. The premise is that they can do maximal damage before the police respond and no one will be armed immediately at the onset of their attack. In the case of having a select number of concealed carry people in a school who are well trained and anonymous, that makes the response time of 5-10 minutes down to less than a minute or even less if they are stopped at their entry point as happened with the 2007 church incident in Colorado Springs.

I would further point out that a large number of churches now have their own private security teams, most of them completely voluntary and unpaid that makes them a less viable target for these kinds of creeps. There is a reason that churches are no longer one of the major killing zones as they were more than 10 years ago. Understanding the threat, churches have responded dramatically. Most people don't even see the security forces since they are often anonymous members of law enforcement in their area. Schools could have more than a decade ago responded as the churches did to this new and evolving threat but in large part due to political correctness and anti-gun political agendas, folks instead hid their head in the sand and the carnage continues unabated. We truly do not need a large political task force trying to find a solution to this problem. Security experts have made concrete recommendations for years that politicians have chosen to ignore.

If folks wish to keep to political correctness and denial, so be it.  Gun control will not solve this terrible problem. Israel, Peru and the Philippines brought their school killings to an end. Understanding the risks and further understanding that you can defend yourself safely and effectively will add the further dimension of deterrence. There is much written on these issues from security experts, but I seriously doubt you will see much of that knowledge in the President's task force.

[Chris]

Well it seems from previous news also that the one problem in common is that parents do not store the guns properly in a safe area that can be locked down to restrict access. Definitly would make it easier to access if it was key locked and a key was in the room or on the owner, but memory or a code does hinder access more.
 
Most of the gang shootings tho are done with illegal purchased firearms where gun laws would not help. However there should be something for proper gun ownership for those who obtain guns properly, but do not store them properly to avoid kids accessing the firearms.
 
So it seems with some reports the mother knew her son had some issues, yet may not have taken steps to properly lock down her firearms to prevent easy access.

[Hemodoc]

Well it seems from previous news also that the one problem in common is that parents do not store the guns properly in a safe area that can be locked down to restrict access. Definitly would make it easier to access if it was key locked and a key was in the room or on the owner, but memory or a code does hinder access more.
 
Most of the gang shootings tho are done with illegal purchased firearms where gun laws would not help. However there should be something for proper gun ownership for those who obtain guns properly, but do not store them properly to avoid kids accessing the firearms.
 
So it seems with some reports the mother knew her son had some issues, yet may not have taken steps to properly lock down her firearms to prevent easy access.

Chris,

As a gun owner, the privilege of owning a gun comes with many responsibilities not the least of which is properly securing your guns. Most owners have a large gun safe if they have multiple firearms. The untold story is how the mother failed to keep her guns away from her child.

With the amount of money she has, there is really no excuse for not having a large safe and a retention safe bedside for immediate access for self protection. If the mother had secured her weapons from him, we never would have heard of this tragedy. Very sad situation all the way around.

[MooseMom]

Nancy Lanza was buried yesterday in an undisclosed location.  In all of the memorials, she was never mentioned.  When people talk about now many were killed, she is not included.  I find this to be extremely sad and completely lacking in compassion.

Adam Lanza was not a "child".  He was an adult who was obviously intent upon wreaking havoc.  For all we know, his mother DID keep her guns secure, but perhaps her son was so determined to get to them that he found a way.  She was asleep at the time, and if he had been planning this deed for a while, he may well have discovered a way to bypass her security measures.  Even "responsible" people can make a mistake.  So please, can we have a little bit of Christian compassion for this woman?  We don't yet know enough to be able to so roundly comdemn her.

I know we have the Constitutional right to bear arms, but we also have the right to decide what kind of weapons and ammunition we have access to.  There is this soldier that has returned from Afghanistan, and when he heard about the weapons used in Newtown, he remarked that the Bushmaster was the same gun he used during battle, and how can it be that civilians in the US have access to the same weapons?  That's a very valid question.

"Gun control" seems to mean different things to different people.  I do not see why we cannot require the closing of such loopholes like lack of comprehensive background checks of people buying guns at shows, or why we cannot outlaw the purchase of ginormous magazines.  If what you really want, as a "responsible gun owner" is to have a weapon for self-protection, then please explain why you need a Bushmaster.  I really do not understand this reasoning.  From a purely logistical point of view, you can't very well conceal/carry such a weapon, so what do you do?  Keep it loaded and accessible by your bedside?  What if you have children in the house?  Can you keep such a weapon securely stored yet still have easy access to it, in the dark, should an intruder come into your home at night?

And can we please get away from this meme that President Obama has some sort of agenda which would ultimately take away everyone's guns?  That's that bastard Wayne LaPierre talking, and his sole goal is to frighten silly people into spending yet more money on guns, shoveling shedloads of money into the gobs of gun manufacturers.  That man is a menace.  Truly responsible gun owners should disavow every word that man utters.

Many liberals have been scathing in their criticism of Obama, that he has done nothing about gun control.  When did he once address this issue in either of his campaigns?  Nowhere.  Yet LaPierre hallucinates and starts babbling about some great conspiracy to "take away our guns", causing a run on weapons purchases, which is exactly what he wants.  Gullible Americans start hallucinating, too, which is exactly what this man wants.  More money.  It's all about money, tarted up as some threat to "freedom and liberty".  Responsible gunowners are anything but if they believe this BS.

Lastly, we need to stop thinking of this issue solely in terms of mass murders.  People are gunned down every day in this country, and most of the time we don't even hear about it.  THOSE victims are part of this discussion, too.

[Rerun]

Well it seems from previous news also that the one problem in common is that parents do not store the guns properly in a safe area that can be locked down to restrict access. Definitly would make it easier to access if it was key locked and a key was in the room or on the owner, but memory or a code does hinder access more.
 
Most of the gang shootings tho are done with illegal purchased firearms where gun laws would not help. However there should be something for proper gun ownership for those who obtain guns properly, but do not store them properly to avoid kids accessing the firearms.
 
So it seems with some reports the mother knew her son had some issues, yet may not have taken steps to properly lock down her firearms to prevent easy access.

This kid was 20 years old.  Not a child!  Said to be a genius?  You don't think he could figure out a way to get to her guns in a safe?  If you know your kid or person living with you (age 50?) has mental problems you get the guns out of the house. 

[jbeany]

Jbeany.... You sound like you know too much information about guns.  You a packer?  Maybe I missed it if you said you were.

Only a criminal would do such a task and most the gang bangers don't have that type of knowledge.  It is NOT legal at all to modify any weapon in that manner and I don't know anyone who has done such a thing.  In addition, the M-16 used by the military has a 3 round burst since you really can't accurately shoot full auto with any accuracy beyond a very short burst.

Rerun, I married a man with a family gun shop and have done my share of target practice.  I haven't fired a gun since he moved in with his mistress and I divorced him.  (Best to avoid temptation whenever possible.)

And no, Hemodoc, you don't need to be a criminal to modify a gun - those who shoot competitively and even dedicated hobby shooters routinely adjust grips, triggers, and exchange barrels on weapons.  Making a trigger more responsive is a common thing in competitive shooting.  It doesn't take much knowledge at all and it is legal - the kits are easy to find and sold at plenty of gun shops.  It won't take a great leap of intuition to figure out how to adjust the available kits to change a semi-auto to an auto if you are familiar with the process.

Assuming that a "gang banger" can't or wouldn't obtain knowledge that might give them a competitive advantage in a turf war is awfully short-sighted of you.  A lack of formal education and opportunities does not equate to a lack of intelligence.

I'm also reasonably certain the madmen planning to mow down a crowd aren't all that concerned with the accuracy, or lack thereof, in an automatic weapon.

[Rerun]

Lastly, we need to stop thinking of this issue solely in terms of mass murders.  People are gunned down every day in this country, and most of the time we don't even hear about it.  THOSE victims are part of this discussion, too.

   PINK ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM!    

[Rerun]

Rerun, I married a man with a family gun shop and have done my share of target practice.  I haven't fired a gun since he moved in with his mistress and I divorced him.  (Best to avoid temptation whenever possible.)

       least we be tempted!   

[Hemodoc]

Jbeany.... You sound like you know too much information about guns.  You a packer?  Maybe I missed it if you said you were.

Only a criminal would do such a task and most the gang bangers don't have that type of knowledge.  It is NOT legal at all to modify any weapon in that manner and I don't know anyone who has done such a thing.  In addition, the M-16 used by the military has a 3 round burst since you really can't accurately shoot full auto with any accuracy beyond a very short burst.

Rerun, I married a man with a family gun shop and have done my share of target practice.  I haven't fired a gun since he moved in with his mistress and I divorced him.  (Best to avoid temptation whenever possible.)

And no, Hemodoc, you don't need to be a criminal to modify a gun - those who shoot competitively and even dedicated hobby shooters routinely adjust grips, triggers, and exchange barrels on weapons.  Making a trigger more responsive is a common thing in competitive shooting.  It doesn't take much knowledge at all and it is legal - the kits are easy to find and sold at plenty of gun shops.  It won't take a great leap of intuition to figure out how to adjust the available kits to change a semi-auto to an auto if you are familiar with the process.

Assuming that a "gang banger" can't or wouldn't obtain knowledge that might give them a competitive advantage in a turf war is awfully short-sighted of you.  A lack of formal education and opportunities does not equate to a lack of intelligence.

I'm also reasonably certain the madmen planning to mow down a crowd aren't all that concerned with the accuracy, or lack thereof, in an automatic weapon.

Dear Jbeany,

Trigger jobs for competitive guns is like you said very common that is only to modify how many pounds of trigger pull it takes to fire the gun. Many competitive folks want a 1 or 2 pound trigger pull. Manufacturers on most hand guns have a 10 pound trigger pull for double action and 5-7 pounds on single action. Competitive shooters do modify their weapons often.

One of the aspects of concealed carry that gives them an advantage over the usual gang banger is that they don't get the training that we do. I saw a film of a gang banger shooting where the man only had 3 bullets in his magazine when he shot a rival gang member. A well trained CCW permit holder always carries a full magazine and usually has one or two spare magazines as well. No, the data from the law enforcement folks is that most gang bangers are not sophisticated weapon experts and thank the Lord for that fact. My source for that is Ed Santos of Center Target Sports. He is an international firearms and security expert.

Modifying a trigger so that you have full automatic is quite illegal and I don't know of anyone that would do that who is a competitive shooter WITHOUT the proper permits and in selected states. Gun owners may despise many of the restrictive gun laws, but they like their guns more so that do adhere to all of the laws in place today. Once again, a trigger job to make the gun easier to shoot for competitive shooting is not at all the same as making a legal gun full auto.

As far as field stripping a "black rifle," they are designed to be fixed and cleaned in the field within a couple of minutes. Changing the components is not harder than field stripping one of these rifles to make it function properly again. They are designed to have very few interchangeable parts. Many gangs do have ex-military people who get advanced military training and bring it back to their gangs. However, the average teenage kid involved in these gangs does not at all have that type of training and expertise on weapons. Once again, it is one of the advantages that law enforcement counts in their encounters. It only takes a soldier a couple of days to learn how to field strip and assemble these weapons designed to do just that. However, making the gun full auto is not something folks are taught. I am sure the sophisticated competitive shooters who are a special breed all to themselves know their guns inside and out. But they don't want the ATF taking all of their guns so they don't.  I would venture that the number of cases of modified full auto that have been prosecuted could be counted on one hand. In ordinary gun circles, it simply does not happen no matter how simple or complicated it is. Competitive shooters want to keep their guns pure and simple. Having an illegal gun is just not something that happens.

As far as accuracy of full auto, Jbeany, give me a break, I am simply stating a fact of how our US military uses full auto. For the ordinary soldier they don't, they have three round bursts or pure semi-auto. Seals and Delta force is a different issue. They found that full auto in combat wasted ammo, was less accurate and less useful. I just spoke to a friend of ours who is in a private security firm in Iraq. He just went back in country last Thursday. I discussed the full auto issue with him. He is an expert in firearms and he stated you can't hit anything with full auto, you don't have the control needed. He does prefer semi-auto for combat purposes but states that the three round burst in a firefight is very useful and easy to control.  In any case, full auto is completely off topic since none of these mass shootings used full auto that I am aware of. I will have to double check the Columbine shootings to confirm that, but Aurora and this one and the Arizona shooting were all semi-auto.

Now, how fast does a semi-auto shoot, as fast as you pull the trigger. How fast does a revolver shoot, as fast as you pull the trigger. Once again, Look up Jerry Miculek and you will see that the whole semi-auto issue is truly a non-issue. We have many rapidly repeating firearms that are not at all semi-auto.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uisHfKj2JiI

Once again, will America implement effective security measures in schools that are simple, well proven and non-obtrusive or will we just get political wrangling from this administration.

[Hemodoc]

Nancy Lanza was buried yesterday in an undisclosed location.  In all of the memorials, she was never mentioned.  When people talk about now many were killed, she is not included.  I find this to be extremely sad and completely lacking in compassion.

Adam Lanza was not a "child".  He was an adult who was obviously intent upon wreaking havoc.  For all we know, his mother DID keep her guns secure, but perhaps her son was so determined to get to them that he found a way.  She was asleep at the time, and if he had been planning this deed for a while, he may well have discovered a way to bypass her security measures.  Even "responsible" people can make a mistake.  So please, can we have a little bit of Christian compassion for this woman?  We don't yet know enough to be able to so roundly comdemn her.

I know we have the Constitutional right to bear arms, but we also have the right to decide what kind of weapons and ammunition we have access to.  There is this soldier that has returned from Afghanistan, and when he heard about the weapons used in Newtown, he remarked that the Bushmaster was the same gun he used during battle, and how can it be that civilians in the US have access to the same weapons?  That's a very valid question.

"Gun control" seems to mean different things to different people.  I do not see why we cannot require the closing of such loopholes like lack of comprehensive background checks of people buying guns at shows, or why we cannot outlaw the purchase of ginormous magazines.  If what you really want, as a "responsible gun owner" is to have a weapon for self-protection, then please explain why you need a Bushmaster.  I really do not understand this reasoning.  From a purely logistical point of view, you can't very well conceal/carry such a weapon, so what do you do?  Keep it loaded and accessible by your bedside?  What if you have children in the house?  Can you keep such a weapon securely stored yet still have easy access to it, in the dark, should an intruder come into your home at night?

And can we please get away from this meme that President Obama has some sort of agenda which would ultimately take away everyone's guns?  That's that bastard Wayne LaPierre talking, and his sole goal is to frighten silly people into spending yet more money on guns, shoveling shedloads of money into the gobs of gun manufacturers.  That man is a menace.  Truly responsible gun owners should disavow every word that man utters.

Many liberals have been scathing in their criticism of Obama, that he has done nothing about gun control.  When did he once address this issue in either of his campaigns?  Nowhere.  Yet LaPierre hallucinates and starts babbling about some great conspiracy to "take away our guns", causing a run on weapons purchases, which is exactly what he wants.  Gullible Americans start hallucinating, too, which is exactly what this man wants.  More money.  It's all about money, tarted up as some threat to "freedom and liberty".  Responsible gunowners are anything but if they believe this BS.

Lastly, we need to stop thinking of this issue solely in terms of mass murders.  People are gunned down every day in this country, and most of the time we don't even hear about it.  THOSE victims are part of this discussion, too.

Dear Moosemom,

1) Securing weapons is not only an issue of personal responsibility, it is also a legal issue. If Lanza had not killed his mother, it is likely she would today face criminal and huge civil liability issues. Thus, as gun owners understanding this responsibility and criminal civil liability issue, how she allowed any access under any circumstance to a kid that she understood was mentally unstable is absolutely an area of criticism. Many parents have already been prosecuted when young children possessed their weapons and were hurt or killed.  Here is one example:

http://potomaclocal.com/2012/08/09/step-father-charged-in-child-shooting-death/

In fact, don't be surprised if her estate is sued by the many victims just because of her lawful duty to secure her weapons. In reality, this is the smoking gun failure of this entire tragedy. It is an absolutely valid criticism of the mother of the shooter to ask this question. Believe me, lots of lawyers are doing just that right now and whatever is left of her estate is already a target for them.

2) Semi-auto firearms are a very OLD invention dating back to 1885.

Early history (1885–1945)

The first successful design for a semi-automatic rifle is attributed to German-born gunsmith Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher, who unveiled the design in 1885.[1] The Model 85 was followed by the equally innovative Mannlicher Models 91, 93 and 95 semi-automatic rifles.[2] Although Mannlicher earned his reputation with his bolt action rifle designs, he also produced a few semi-automatic pistols, including the Steyr Mannlicher M1894, which employed an unusual blow-forward action and held five rounds of 6.5 mm ammunition that were fed into the M1894 by a stripper clip.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-automatic_firearm

Once again, how fast does a semi-auto shoot? As fast as you pull the trigger. How fast does an "old fashioned" revolver shoot? As fast as you pull the trigger.

3) There are no differences functionally between popular mini-14 ranch rifle semi-auto and these "black rifles."

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/models.html

Yet in prior legislation, they did not at all address the mini-14 ranch rifle used by many western ranchers in the US. Many have gone to the exchangeable parts of the AR-15 platform since they are so simple to replace and cost effective. What about semi-auto pistols and semi-auto shotguns? All shoot the same .223 round that is also used in military rifles. I would point out that the .223 round is dwarfed by ordinary hunting rounds for large game such as the 30-06. The .223 shoots a very small bullet at high velocity. The 30-06 shoots a large bullet at high velocity. The 30-06 was the weapon of choice in the WWI all the way through to the Korean conflict. The .223 is tiny in comparison. Since the 30-06 is "military" rifle, one of the most successful for military purposes, should we ban 30-06 as well?

4) Obama has publicly been anti-gun for a long time. The fact that he did not speak about gun control or venture into it during his first term was simply a tactical part of his reelection since there are a lot of democrats and independents who are also gun enthusiasts.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/26/Obama-Demagogued-Gun-Control-in-Illinois-Vetting

5) Moosemom, please, let's discuss facts and issues, not liberal media propaganda talking points.

Four of the five SCOTUS members are anti-gun. One more justice and Americans who enjoy legally owning guns see great danger to this right.
Obama is publicly anti-gun, this is not some hallucination from Wayne.
The NRA is not very popular among many gun owners. He does not speak with a united voice for all of us. There are actually other gun forums more popular among gun owners, but they are the largest.
The overwhelming majority of democratic politicians are anti-gun with some exceptions such as Harry Reid because of the popularity of guns in Nevada.
The UN is VERY anti-gun and is developing the small arms treaty that Clinton and Obama support. In fact, Clinton gave approval to the current draft the day AFTER Obama was elected.
No, Obama just was biding his time until his second term.  Gun owners have understood this for several years and it is no surprise at all that he has a commission now to look at gun control. Yes, you are right, if this was before the election, he would not mention gun control at all just as he didn't do it with the Aurora shootings.

5) Gun deaths in the US have decreased dramatically over the last two decades. Many attribute that in part to the popularity of concealed carry laws.

[Hemodoc]

Well it seems from previous news also that the one problem in common is that parents do not store the guns properly in a safe area that can be locked down to restrict access. Definitly would make it easier to access if it was key locked and a key was in the room or on the owner, but memory or a code does hinder access more.
 
Most of the gang shootings tho are done with illegal purchased firearms where gun laws would not help. However there should be something for proper gun ownership for those who obtain guns properly, but do not store them properly to avoid kids accessing the firearms.
 
So it seems with some reports the mother knew her son had some issues, yet may not have taken steps to properly lock down her firearms to prevent easy access.

This kid was 20 years old.  Not a child!  Said to be a genius?  You don't think he could figure out a way to get to her guns in a safe?  If you know your kid or person living with you (age 50?) has mental problems you get the guns out of the house.

Actually, that is the responsible action many people do, removing weapons from the house all together in similar situations with unstable people in the house. If the kid had any access to the weapons, then yes, she should have removed them from the house.

[MooseMom]

Hemodoc, how exactly do you define "gun control"?

Sorry, I don't buy the whole "Obama's out to get your gun" conspiracy theory.  The greatest force behind the current anti-gun sentiment is not President Obama but is, instead, Adam Lanza.  Sure, I believe that Obama is anti-gun.  I suspect that now, a lot of people are anti-gun, but I'm not seeing anyone demanding the total confiscation of everyone's firearms.  Just what exactly is it that you and Mr. LaPierre think he is going to do?

I have no doubt that people are already lawyering up to sue Nancy Lanza's estate.  But I urge you once again to remember that her son was not a child and must bear some responsibility, if not ALL of the responsibility. 

Then again,that's the risk any gunowner runs if s/he keeps any sort of weapon in her home and it is stolen by a third party.  Are you saying that any gunowner who has a weapon stolen bears responsibility if that weapon is used to murder someone?  If your weapon is stolen, then it obviously wasn't adequately secured.

How do you keep your weapons secured?  How does the law respond in your state if your gun was stolen from you and was used in a crime?

Everyone, keep in mind that the investigators don't have all of the information yet regarding how Nancy Lanza stored her weapons.  But legally, she had the right to keep her guns in her home.  There is no law against that.  Perhaps she thought she had adequately secured them.  And that brings me to this question...should any gunowner who has a mentally unstable person living in his/her home be legally banned from keeping their legally acquired weapon at their home?  Does the Second Amendment not apply to the parents/family members of people who are suspected of being mentally ill?