does it matter that

[gejohnston]

the cops didn't bother to watch Rogers' videos, or bother to check California's gun registry (which is at the point of purchase) to see if he bought any?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/police-didnt-search-database-showing-calif-shooter-had-bought-guns/2014/05/30/59ad5186-e74f-11e3-a86b-362fd5443d19_story.html

[randys1]

1. More reason to get rid of guns period.

But until that mature and adult solution is reached, what we clearly need to do is hire a few thousand out of work Americans to manage a database for guns where all guns are registered and all owners...

Wouldnt that make sense?

A cop could go on his laptop in the field and get tons of info in seconds.

[gejohnston]

2. the cops had the access in their car laptop

they could have done exactly what you suggest, they simply didn't do it.
To your larger point, three of his victims were still stabbed to death, half of the wounded with a car. Given the amount of time he planned it, it would have been easier and cheaper for him to get them from a street corner instead of paying full MSRP, background check, one gun per month plus ten day waiting period.
The 2001 mass murder in the same town, the killer used his 1991 Saab to kill four people. Reports I saw say it was the same motive.

[randys1]

4. I always have a question for gun enthusiasts or NRA folks

what future represents evolution


future 1) everybody has a gun, people are shooting each other on purpose, by mistake and so on all the time, some folks are safe most are not as everybody is armed and the guns are more efficient than ever


future 2) nobody has a gun, nobody is shooting each other, the occasional physical violent crime happens with a knife or whatever, but overall as a result of taking 100 years to get rid of ALL guns, nobody shoots anybody else

Which future do you want for your great grandkids?

[Duckhunter935]

5. Looks like it will be Future 3

Guns are available and legal to own unless you are a prohibited person as defined by law. Those people would be restricted from owning firearms. Sensible limits on types of weapons like short barreled shotguns and fully automatic rifles and machine guns. Increase mental health care and data in the background check database. Police use all available resources if called to check on the welfare of an individual.

[gejohnston]

6. I grew up and still live in none of the above

60 percent of the people owning guns, nobody shooting each other. When I was kid, we didn't lock our doors nor keep our guns loaded. With more roof top solar and electric cars, Big Oil and Big Coal will leave keep Helen's dream alive (see sig)

[Starboard Tack]

8. Ah, if only we could go back in time to when you were a kid. nt

[gejohnston]

11. My hometown is still like that.

A few months ago, some guy on a multi state robbery spree hit one of our banks. Our first bank robbery in 112 years. Of course, the oil field does bring a seedy element of people (camp followers) to fleece the roughnecks's of their hard earned money. Oh, and there is fracking too.

[hack89]

12. The future in the middle where some people are armed

And violence continues to decline like it has for the past 20 years.

[ileus]

13. "Occasioinal"....LOL

I'll take my chances with the ability I have now to protect my loved ones, not on where attacks are fine as long as they're only somewhat periodical.

I want my great grandkids to have the ability to protect themselves efficiently and effectively.

[Lizzie Poppet]

18. I always have a question for people who don't understand false dichotomies.

"Have you considered studying philosophy and logic?"

[AtheistCrusader]

19. I take issue with your use of 'occasional'.

I live in a pretty sleepy town. 2 months ago, someone lay in wait behind a restaurant and ambushed the last worker to leave after lockup.

The man stabbed her in the chest and raped her.


Someone should have shot that piece of shit. It would be reasonable to use a firearm against such a villain, under that sort of assault. I think it can be reasonably argued he meant for her to die. There's really no friendly or casual way to stab someone in the chest.


As for shootings, I've been living in this town for 10 years. Not a single murder with a gun. Not even any accidents, or attempted murders, to my knowledge. Nothing in the police blotter anyway.

[NYC_SKP]

3. We are never going to get rid of guns.

EOM

[Eleanors38]

9. More laws to ignore? Prohibitionism doesn't work...

Ganja, gays, guns, gin, it's all the same: Expense, ineffectiveness, corruption, black market. Why this addiction to a booming failure of social policy? Does every generation have to feverishly purchase that little baggy in the alley, because everything will be alright if I have just another hit?

Over and over.

[stone space]

14. You make guns sound like a drug. Perhaps guns do act like a drug for some folks, but...

...not for normal people.

[Eleanors38]

15. I'm against prohibition. That includes laws against gays.

I choose not to equate guns with gays, gin or ganja, though some folks may disagree.

[stone space]

16. Guns are people too, my friend, and guns have civil rights, just like you, me, and...

...the Bank of America.

[Eleanors38]

17. Stoned in space! Did you read the Dowd OP in GD?

She got a med marijuana candy bar in CO -- and ate the who-o-o-le thing. Hilarious. Reminded me of Minnie the Moocher B. Boop cartoon ('31). Cab Calloway moon-walking the intro.

[blueridge3210]

20. Guns are people?

Where did you come up with that bit of wisdom?

[stone space]

21. From a Presidential canditate. Did I get the quote wrong? (nt)

[blueridge3210]

22. Which candidate? What is the quote? (nt)

[blueridge3210]

23. *crickets* (nt)

[blueridge3210]

24. Nothing yet (nt)

[blueridge3210]

25. Still nothing (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

26. more crickets nt

[blueridge3210]

28. Still no response.

It would appear, given the lack of a citation or quote, that NO presidential candidate ever said "Guns are people too". Color me surprised.

[Jenoch]

10. We will never be able to get to "...get rid of guns period." until we can

fungibly administrate synergistic fungibility of the economics of the gun industry.

[spin]

27. It sounds so simple until you consider that gun control advocates ...

were unable to pass an assault weapons ban in the Democratically controlled Senate after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

First you say you wish to register all firearms. Conservatives and gun owners oppose this idea even more than they do an assault weapons ban. Even if by some miracle you managed to get this signed into law, a good number of gun owners would simply refuse to register their weapons. Some would decide to coat some of their firearms in Cosmoline, place them in PVC pipes and bury them in a hidden location. (I have talked to gun owners who have told me that they already had done this.)

When you passed a law to ban all firearms you would most likely have to cordon off neighborhoods and search every house. This would be very expensive and time consuming and it would be somewhat difficult to find people willing to risk their lives to take guns away from honest citizens. You might well start a revolution and/or some states would simply secede from the union. Even if you were successful you would manage to create far more violence and terrorist activities than we have today. This would outweigh any advantages of banning and confiscating all firearms.

That's why most thinking people who are gun control advocates tell gun owners, "Nobody is taking about taking your guns."

[Eleanors38]

7. Give 'em all these laws, and they just eat 'em.