General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "I知 not anti-gun, I知 pro-kindergartner" [View all]aikoaiko
(34,162 posts)1. Everyone favors reasonable responses to tragedies. Banning some guns won't do much. Connecticut has an Assault Weapons Ban and all news reports are saying the rifle was leglly owned. So much for partial gun bans.
2. To fight drunk driving we punish those who do it and try to prevent those from doing it but we don't ban cars or alcohol.
3.I agree that focussing on the massacre is not a distraction.
4. When ever the government calls up the unorganized militia, then youll see it. The point of the 2nd was to protect the right of the people to have arms In order to form a militia if needed.
5. Militias are well regulated, not individuals. It sounds like Lanza should have been institutionalized
6. This is true and the grandmother killer should been in prison but they let him out.
7. Actually you can buy a tank, but ordnances are tightly controlled.
8. The US does not provide for unrestricted gun ownership.
9. Yep. When it comes to civil liberties it's amazing how people fight for some but hand wave off others (which includes gun banners).
10. No we are not safe enough but gun homicides are lower than they were 20-30 years ago. I don't attribute that to more guns, but they didn't prevent the decreases either
11. Three gun competitions typically use rifles that some people seek to ban.
12. Maybe Eskow needs his own island to feel safe.