HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » It is Much Too Soon to Di...

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:02 PM

It is Much Too Soon to Discuss Changing Gun Laws After NY Shooting

The shooter in Webster NY that lured firefighters to his burning home owned a Bushmaster .223, the same weapon that was used in Newtown, Conn.

Although it has not been determined which weapon was used in the shooting ( he owned a shot gun, a pistol and the semi-automatic rifle) my guess it's the Bushmaster.

However, according to the NRA, it is too soon after the tragedy in New York to discuss new gun measures.

and if these fucking crazies with assault weapons keep these multiple shootings in the proper time intervals as ascribed by the NRA, there will never be a time to get to that discussion, never mind the actual changing of the gun laws to something more akin to a civilized society.

Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/2012/12/25/killer-firemen-had-semiautomatic-rifle/nT8sAMWgiwhQMhiXo73yLP/story.html

50 replies, 6466 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 50 replies Author Time Post
Reply It is Much Too Soon to Discuss Changing Gun Laws After NY Shooting (Original post)
louis c Dec 2012 OP
bowens43 Dec 2012 #1
Care Acutely Dec 2012 #46
farminator3000 Dec 2012 #2
Zoeisright Dec 2012 #25
bossy22 Dec 2012 #3
Whovian Dec 2012 #4
bossy22 Dec 2012 #6
jody Dec 2012 #10
Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #35
jody Dec 2012 #39
bossy22 Dec 2012 #12
HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #5
bossy22 Dec 2012 #7
Robb Dec 2012 #8
LineLineLineReply ?
bossy22 Dec 2012 #9
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #13
Robb Dec 2012 #17
HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #18
Poll_Blind Dec 2012 #16
11 Bravo Dec 2012 #11
louis c Dec 2012 #15
jody Dec 2012 #14
louis c Dec 2012 #19
jody Dec 2012 #20
louis c Dec 2012 #31
jody Dec 2012 #32
louis c Dec 2012 #33
jody Dec 2012 #34
louis c Dec 2012 #36
jody Dec 2012 #38
louis c Dec 2012 #43
jody Dec 2012 #45
louis c Dec 2012 #47
jody Dec 2012 #48
XRubicon Dec 2012 #50
customerserviceguy Dec 2012 #21
Lex Dec 2012 #22
jody Dec 2012 #23
Lex Dec 2012 #24
jody Dec 2012 #26
Lex Dec 2012 #27
jody Dec 2012 #28
louis c Dec 2012 #37
jody Dec 2012 #40
louis c Dec 2012 #41
jody Dec 2012 #42
Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #29
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #30
Taverner Dec 2012 #44
spanone Dec 2012 #49

Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:12 PM

1. F*ck the NRA, this is exactly the right time.

what a completely asinine remark.....the people are real idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:35 PM

46. 1000 X this ^^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:34 PM

2. nice

"The phrase "Catch-22", "a problematic situation for which the only solution is denied by a circumstance inherent in the problem or by a rule," has entered the English language."

the premise is you either have to ask to be let out of flying bomber missions, or be crazy.

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.
Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions.
Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he were sane he had to fly them.
If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to.
Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle. (p. 56, ch. 5)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farminator3000 (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:08 PM

25. Completely wrong.

The premise is NOT a Catch-22. It's simply that it's incredibly stupid to put off discussion of a problem while the problem is occurring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:37 PM

3. ponder this

would the situation be any different if the gentleman had a bolt action "hunting rifle"

Maybe, but probably not.

I would like to know how this gentleman got his weapons

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:41 PM

4. It very well could have

 

It takes time to chamber a round and takes a person's concentration away from the target.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:49 PM

6. not much time.

under 1 sec and you don't have to move out of your shooting position.

Not to mention, even with a semi-auto, the recoil forces you to have to re-acquire the "target".

Also, it seems what gave the shooter away partially was the noticable repitition of the gunshot sound. IF he had used a bolt action and the shot timing slower, would FF still have noticed it as quickly? I'm a volunteer FF myself and i have to tell you that when you arrive on the scene of an actual fire, no matter how well trained or experienced you are, you get some form of "tunnel vision".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bossy22 (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:04 PM

10. Agree! Most people have never seen a high-power match where Springfield 1903 bolt actions compete

 

against Garand semi-automatics in sitting (60 seconds at 200 yards) and prone (70 seconds at 300 yards with a change of clip or magazine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 05:36 PM

35. Show me anyone doing that with moving targets.

While they, too, are moving.

And is proficient at hitting anything, without years of practice.

Years.


Rapid fire with a bolt action and a fixed target in a controlled environment is one thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #35)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:39 PM

39. What range, 10 yards or 25? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:08 PM

12. here is a vid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:45 PM

5. Hmmm, just like the PATRIOT ACT, we all know and love so well.

I don't want law made in fear.

I suspect that laws that show up in less than 10 business days from an event are likely to:

1--not make much consideration of the conflicts they create.
2--be only slightly modified from boilerplate supplied by a special interest think tank.
3--address the risks that produce the most reactive fear in the hazard, rather than the most likely risks (admitting of course that it is possible for those things to intersect).




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:50 PM

7. Agreed

excellent post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:51 PM

8. Because no one's even THOUGHT about gun control, ever,

...until these most recent shootings?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:57 PM

9. ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:09 PM

13. Have you turned your own guns yet?

 

Or are you just keeping the parts around just in case you need them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:19 PM

17. Like Toys for Tots, only creepier.

I have a build-your-own P220, P226 and Model 28-2 "kit" being taken into evidence by a kind LEO tomorrow at 10 am. If not claimed, the parts will be destroyed.

I do not intend to claim them. I'm done being part of the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:23 PM

18. Well, mostly because legislators don't write much legislation

It's often handed to their offices by persons pushing a legislative agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:15 PM

16. A very astute observation! +1 nt

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:07 PM

11. Of course it is! And by Thursday there will almost certainly have been ...

another mass shooting, and for fuck's sake, we certainly can't politicize that one either! I guess we just need to STFU and watch, as innocents continue to be slaughtered.
And by the way, I have hunted since I was a kid. I'm a US Army combat veteran with a VA concealed carry permit, who owns a 9mm Glock, my dad's .45 cal service revolver, a 30.06 rifle, and a 12 gauge shotgun. Each of them has a trigger lock, and they are all secured in a gun safe. The ammunition for all four weapons is kept in a second safe. I believe that it's imperative that the gun show loophole be closed, the assault weapon ban be re-instated, and that the one gun per month limit be re-instituted in Virginia.
In short, I'm a gun owner who believes that the NRA is a collection of maniacs, led by a coterie of paranoid dipshits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 11 Bravo (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:15 PM

15. God Bless You

I am not against responsible gun ownership.

But I do not see a need for an assault weapon, 30 clip magazines, a lack of a centralized registration data base, thorough background checks, and a government agent, of some sort, at any gun show to make sure all the purchases follow the law.

I don't think that's too much to ask, do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:13 PM

14. People who commit traditional violent crime appear to be different than mass murderers.

 

Proposals that would ban guns under the belief guns create crime ignore the latest government report.

"Gun Control Legislation” by CRS (Nov 14, 2012) reports

- from 1994 to 2007, firearm number increased from 192 million to 294 million.

- from 1994 to 2007, Firearms-Related Murder Rate decreased from 6.6 to 3.9.

Until that report is refuted, laws to prevent mass-murder should focus on the person and not banning the firearm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:11 PM

19. Perhaps the rest of the civilized world just haven't got our common sense

that MORE guns in the hands of more people reduces gun deaths.

Even if we prevented the sale of another gun in America, we still have 3 million. In 1993, Clinton put 100,000 more police on the streets.

We have the 10th highest gun deaths per 100 population in the world. We are worse than every other civilized country.

Here are the only countries we have fewer gun deaths than: (1). El Salvador, (2). Jamaica, (3). Honduras, (4). Guatemala, (5). Swaziland, (6). Colombia, (7). Brazil, (8). Panama, (9) Mexico then comes the good old U S of A, number 10. Not one of the nations ahead of us could be called a civilized society, (including the drug cartel nation of Mexico).

Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:43 PM

20. I'm a scientist. Your post uses stats from nations with different cultures. I've conducted and

 

directed research on scientific hypothesis and social issues that are not science.

One might conjecture that there are more factors than firearms affecting those who commit traditional "violent crime" and "mass murderers".

Please see

IMO the problem is "self-defense" and "group-defense" and a solution must satisfy both.

Mass Shootings and the Ethic of the Open Heart Medscape Today (Dec 20, 2012)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #20)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 06:52 AM

31. England, Canada and Australia

How different are those cultures from us?

Western Europe?

Come on. Your hypothesis that we become safer when we have more guns is absurd, no matter how you try to slice it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:25 AM

32. Not my hypothesis just data from a govt report. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #32)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 05:22 PM

33. Your opinion was that all those countries had a "different culture"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #33)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 05:23 PM

34. "14. People who commit traditional violent crime appear to be different than mass murderers."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #34)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 06:43 PM

36. I'm talking about all gun deaths.

The possession of guns causes gun deaths.

More Guns = More Gun Deaths.

USA #10, behind only the most violent countries on the face of the earth.

Do you think Canadians and Britons can't get their hands on violent video games, or that they can't watch violent movies or TV programs?

What's the difference between these two countries and us?

Gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #36)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:35 PM

38. Suggest you start your own OP rather than hijack this thread. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:22 PM

43. I thought this was my OP a couple of days ago, jody

If I remember correctly the name on the OP is louis c.

But perhaps I'm mistaken. Maybe I'm not me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #43)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:31 PM

45. OP was about murder. My #14 was about murder. Your #36 shifts to "More Guns = More Gun Deaths".

 

Mea culpa for saying hijacking OP.

I correct and say "You introduce a red herring to avoid addressing facts reported in #14.

Thanks for calling my attention to that mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #45)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:38 PM

47. Apology Accepted

I respectively disagree with all your arguments on the subject.

We will not convince one another on this issue.

You are a well established DUer, so I know what you are saying is from the heart and that we probably agree on the next 99 issues.

I would love to keep up this jousting, however, I am in the middle of negotiations and actually come to DU as a sort of respite from my real work.

As a result, I will not be responding on this thread in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:41 PM

48. Hope your negotiations are all in your favor. Best wishes for you and yours over the New Year.

 

Hope to exchange posts with you on future DU threads.

jody

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:01 PM

50. Please see this paper for research you'll find enlightening

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:46 PM

21. Discuss it all you want, it's not going to change anything

Maybe, maybe, maybe, there will be some ineffective language knocking a few poorly-selling weapons out of Wal-Mart, and maybe there will be reductions on magazine sizes, but it won't stop anything. Lanza had a pocketful of ammo, all a smaller magazine would have done is slow down his reloading time.

There is absolutely nothing that we can do to stop this. Even if we took all the steps necessary to round up every weapon and every nutjob in this country, we'd never get them all. Never.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to customerserviceguy (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 07:02 PM

22. Wrong.

Other countries have taken effective steps that prove you are wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to customerserviceguy (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 07:18 PM

23. Agree and too many DUers want to insult and vilify we who support RKBA and ready to join together to

 

search for solutions to prevent another Sandy Hook Tragedy.

Those who "believe guns create crime" are no different from those who believe "god created the universe", gun-creationists.

"Gun Control Legislation” by CRS (Nov 14, 2012) reports

- from 1994 to 2007, firearm number increased from 192 million to 294 million.

- from 1994 to 2007, Firearms-Related Murder Rate decreased from 6.6 to 3.9.

Until that report is refuted, laws to prevent mass-murder should focus on the person and not banning the firearm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #23)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:00 PM

24. How does that square with Australia's reform?

"Almost two weeks after a shooting spree stunned Australia in 1996, leaving 35 people dead at the Port Arthur tourist spot in Tasmania, the government issued sweeping reforms of the country’s gun laws.

There hasn’t been a mass shooting since.

Now, after the recent shooting at a Connecticut elementary school, Australia’s National Firearm Agreement (NFA), which saw hundreds of thousands of automatic and semi-automatic weapons bought back then destroyed, is being examined as a possible example for the US, to mixed reaction in Australia."


http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun-control-laws


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lex (Reply #24)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:18 PM

26. I don't care about any other country's experience, that's just a special case. I care only about

 

laws that Congress can pass and the Executive branch can implement that will prevent another Sandy Hook Tragedy.

Why do people keep trying to derail debate that should have a single goal "Prevent another Sandy Hook?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #26)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:21 PM

27. So yeah, it doesn't matter one bit if YOU care or not. That is truly irrelevant. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lex (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:33 PM

28. Please post your suggestion on how to prevent another Sandy Hook. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 06:53 PM

37. Here you go

1. Trained Police in all public places. Raise the tax on all gun purchases to 25% to pay for this and add 2% to the capital gains tax, if that's not enough.

2. Ban Gun shows and other individuals (non-licensed sellers) from selling any gun. All purchases must be between a licensed dealer and the purchaser. All private sales must be conducted with a government agent in between or through a licensed dealer for a nominal fee.

3. Ban the sale of all automatic and semi-automatic weapons.

4. Each individual who possesses a banned weapon has 6 months to turn it in for government purchase.

5. Centralized gun registry which prohibits any felon or an unstable person from being licensed to own a gun.

I could keep going, but you've seen enough. I would emulate Australia's gun laws. It seems to be working pretty well there, and that country began as a colony of English speaking criminals.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #37)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:47 PM

40. FBI reports "Knives or cutting instruments" commit 13.3% of murders, "Hands, fists, feet, etc." 5.7%

 

and Rifles and Shotguns 5.4%.

Since "Knives or cutting instruments" and "Hands, fists, feet, etc." murder more people than rifles and shotguns you need to ban them also.

Source Table 20 Murder by State, Types of Weapons, 2011
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #40)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 05:59 PM

41. I'd rather take my chances with hands and feet

Than have somebody want to kill me with a Bushmaster .223.

Come on, you're starting to sound ridiculous

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Reply #41)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 06:31 PM

42. Understand but if you ban firearms, how will you force criminals to follow your ban? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:18 PM

29. The NRA are rabid extremists...

who appear to think that murdering children, firefighters, and anyone else is an acceptable sacrifice, and that a gun has more right to exist than a human being.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:20 PM

30. If we can't discuss gun laws after a shooting, then we can NEVER discuss them...

given the frequency of shootings in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:24 PM

44. Kill Semi Autos

 

Period

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to louis c (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:43 PM

49. the NRA is a terrorist group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread