Did you know this : Kids & Criminals can get Guns

Why don't we stop making them so easy to get to

Published on December 9, 2007 By Dan Greene In Current Events

Catchy first sentence: In researching this topic, I didn't accumulate a whole ton of statistics, though they certainly are available, supporting each angle of a debate, on gun control.

The central theme I keep coming back too, is that with all the laws we have on the books, enforced or not, with all the people who are supposedly criminal and bad, that we have locked up, we still have, an alarming amount of national crime, and tragic losses of gun control where kids or criminals are able to obtain and use guns to commit crimes.

It's a heartbreaking thing to even bring this up, because everybody has a fascination with the debate, some have been injured, or lost loved ones to guns, others hunt, and don't want to lose their guns, some think I'm just plain an idiot for suggesting we make a change, a serious change in this country about how we get and maintain access to guns.

I know there are millions of usages of guns daily around the world, for hunting and sports purposes and legal usages, even self defense. There are also lots of illegal usages. One thing we can all agree on, is that guns, have one purpose, to shoot a projectile at speeds, which if aimed and impact another person can and in many cases do kill. That is their designed purpose. Some guns are designed to shoot targets and thats fine, but handguns are designed to kill, rifles are designed to kill.

Lets set aside all statistics on this for right now. I want to talk about a few recent and notable shootings that have happened. I will try to to provide as much detail and accuracy as I can, feel free to correct me where I am wrong.

#1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907826/posts

In Wisconsin, a young sheriff's deputy was insulted at a party, and it sort of appeared to be a lovers quarrel, this 20 year old male, shot and killed 2 of his best friends, a long time girl friend, this man had access to a gun, as a sheriff deputy and part time police officer in the small community of Crandon. This was at a party, a total of 6 were killed, and a 7th seriously injured. This type of shooting I would guess is the most rare, law enforcement, "snapping" and shooting civilians. Though very tragic, I would guess there is essentially nothing that could have been done. Details are sketchy because the report isn't finished but it isn't clear how the deputy died, but it would appear that
his death, was both self inflicted and by the swat, either self inflicted or suicide by cop.

In any event, without knowing some psychological details in real time, in advance of the situation I don't see how this could have been avoided. There simply isn't any way you can keep guns out of the hands of law enforcement officers, in order to ensure them basic safety, and allow them to neutralize a threat to public safety.

#2
Virginia Tech shooting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre

We all know, something if not a lot about this shooting incident. I remember deciding when this happened to really start to re-evaluate my thoughts on guns, and re-evaluate societies
need to have them as accessible and readily obtainable as they are.

The VT shooting, could have been avoided, either by proper handling of this students emotional issues. I would make the case, that there will be improper handling of students with emotional issues in the future. In any event, today, guns are still as easily obtainable, and this exact same situation could occur. Beyond that, it will occur, because there is no way to stop it without making drastic changes. 33 people died in this one.

#3
Omaha mall shooting
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/13/national/main2466711.shtml (WRONG STORY) (ANOTHER EALIER SHOOTING INVOLVING A MALL)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/06/national/main3586401.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3586401

This is recent and again, nobody should have had to die. An angry 19 year old kid, walks scouts out a mall, and moves in and starts the rampage. Does it matter to you how many are dead?

I guess what I think we should do, is stop allowing people to have guns. We should allow them to own the, to buy them, to shoot them out at the range, to take them hunting for set periods of time, to sight them at the range, but every time we are done with them, we should have the responsibility to take them back to a central location, a warehouse, under heavy guard, and monitored 24 hours a day, every day of the week every day of the year.

Every time a criminal, ever a found guilty of any felony, never gets a gun ever again. Nobody ought to have the ability to carry a gun, to keep it at home, kids are taking them to school, and killing others.

People who have legal access are taking them and killing others. People get angry, they snap, but what they don't do, is go on a rampage with knives or screwdrivers, they use guns, with lots of bullets, and ammo, and they kill lots of people.

If we take guns out of the equation. People can't kill other people with guns.

I know that everybody is gonna be pissed about this idea, but I want to hear what you think is wrong with trying to do this.

Comments (Page 3)

Leauki

on Dec 14, 2007

This is patently untrue. Every article, paragraph and ammendment of the U.S. Constitution is subject to change... in fact, our Constitution even allows for a Constitutional Convention where the whole thing can be thrown out and redone. It isn't an easy thing to do, but it is an option.

So what exactly did your talk about respecting the constitution have to do with the issue? Now you are saying that it is legitimate to change the constitution, just hard. So what exactly is the argument here?

Leauki

on Dec 14, 2007

These are different issues, but since they are not addressed in the U.S. Constitution they are left to local communities and states to decide. Which is what is being done now... and is as it should be.

They are not different issues at all when it comes to freedom.

If you argue that freedom is paramount and that hence guns must be legal, you will also have to support freedom when it comes to other matters.

But the issue remains freedom.

ParaTed2k

on Dec 14, 2007

Ok, shall we play "count the logical fallacies" with your last couple of entries?

In The United States, we have a Constitution. That Constitution doens't tell We the People what we can and can't do, in fact, it doesn't address We the People at all. It is FROM We the People TO the Federal Government telling THEM what authorities WE grant them and in a few cases which authorities we specifically deny them.

The 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution says that the Federal Government cannot infringe on the right of We the People to form militias (because they are necessary to secure a free state) or infringe on our right to bear arms.

Notice something.. it doesn't say we have the right of freedom to do whatever we want. It doesn't mention any other freedoms or rights (talking specifically about the 2nd Amendment here). It says the Federal Government does not have the authority to infringe on these two rights.

It isn't about total freedom at all, so quit taking what I say to rediculous extremes in leiu of an actual argument.

Our Constitution is subject to change because We the People retain the right to decide which authorities we are willing to grant the Federal Government that weren't granted before, and which we have decided to rescind. It doesn't make the document less important, it just means we aren't willing to give up the right to make changes.

Dr Guy

on Dec 15, 2007

The ratio of rampage/population in Europe is far, far from the one in the USA. It won't make the problem disappear, but it can help solve part of it.

The first part of what you state is true. The second part is pure conjecture. There are a lot of reasons for the difference, but assigning all the blame to one factor is not scientifically sound.

All honest people will admit that America does a lot of things better than most of Europe. And the same honest people would also admit that America has problems that Europe does not. And the dishonest argument would be to assign all the blame to gun ownership, which when each of the items in the 2 statements above are closely examined, would be shown to be inane.

Since this is Dan's blog and article, I will not go into the whole sociological and psychological differences and what are plainly other factors involved with this question. I can appreciate those who are against guns, and who argue the issue from a logical and factual standpoint. However, those who take complicated societies and boil them down into a single issue as a make or break milestone are not being honest or factual.

Dan Greene

on Dec 15, 2007

Good points Dr.

I just want people to start looking at the issue with more logic than they do today. It seems to me, that people just accept gun violence as something that can happen, but not to them, when it happens in their community, it's not about keeping the guns out of the hands of people, it's about why didn't we see this criminal before hand?

Well folks, the criminal is as much a person as you or I, in many cases not a criminal at all before the incident that makes them criminal. When it is a criminal rampage that is. Sure plenty of guns are used daily for things not criminal, but my point is that could still happen, with a measure of safety/security, with this warehousing idea.

I think the logic, of no guns in the hands of people, makes sense, when you line up the idea of gun violence, which boils down to just violence, without a gun.

Maybe it only makes sense to me.

Dan Greene

on Feb 22, 2008

This is another article on the subject...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/20/cnnu.guns/index.html

I see this as a typical scenario in any large tech college or college. Students carrying concealed weapons now. Which isn't itself an issue, until said student gets a bad review or bad grade, or pissed about something, insulted in front of the ladies, or men lol, and pulls out their 9mm and ends the life of the offender before they have the time to think it over.

This whole wild west attitude is really what we have developing. I would much rather law enforcement do their job, and law creation, do theirs, we need to stop allowing everybody to have guns. We need to make their ownership and use more restrictive. In my opinion this is the only way to make life more secure in the culture of excess which we have created for ourselves.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!