<p>I grew up in an era (and an area) where everyone had ready access to firearms … and yet nobody got shot. I’m fortunate to have excellent firearms training, including assault weapons. (It’s not JUST policemen who get that training.) And I’m fortunate to have friends all over the country, friends who are about evenly split between gun advocates and gun abolitionists. Each one is certain his/her viewpoint is exactly right. Within the confines of their own experiences, I’m sure each one is sincere in his/her view. It’s just that one person’s viewpoint doesn’t necessarily work for someone else.</p>
<p>If guns aren’t the problem, why don’t we stack loaded assault weapons along the hallways of schools? If guns are the problem why don’t gun bans work? If mental health or violent computer gamers are the culprit, why is 99.9% each population no threat? If arming teachers is the answer, are you going to dismiss those teachers who are tempermentally incapable of taking another persons life? If armed guards are the answer, then shouldn’t they have ready access to superior firepower … just in case it’s needed to fend of someone similarly armed?</p>
<p>In summary, this is an n-dimensional puzzle. It will take some time to solve. And everyone is going to be at least a little unhappy with the result.</p>
<p>@Lergnom, This to me is the crux of the whole problem. The defenders of unfettered gun ownerships are so terrified of ANY change to the rights they currently have that they seem to have lost all perspective. It’s all about damage control and distraction, not genuine concern for every single child (and adult) who is the victim of gun violence. They say things like “school shootings are the price of this freedom” and “Texas has a lower murder rate than it would otherwise because we have better surgeons who can save the lives of more gunshot victims” (paraphrasing). They seldom come out and condemn those who threaten violence against police or civilians because to them their absolute (and flawed) belief in rights conferred by a 224-year-old document is more important than recognizing the realities of the society we live in today.</p>
<p>When it comes to gun control? Sure. Most of the countries of Western Europe, where there isn’t this hick gun fetish going on. </p>
<p>BTW, Columbine had an armed guard, Virginia Tech had an armed police force, and Ft Hood was a frickin’ military base, but keep on believing that if you just arm enough of the “good guys” with guns, it’ll all end like some John Wayne film.</p>
<p>I am not a fan of Michael Moore, but I loved what he said after Newtown - I am paraphrasing, but it went like this - “Gee, if only Adam Lanza’s mother had been a gun owner, she would have been able to shut this whole thing down before he went off to the school.” </p>
<p>I’m all for firearms in the hands of security guards, police and others who are trained to use them, but having your everyday Joe pack a pistol at Starbucks under the belief that he can play cops and robbers and save the day is a fantasy.</p>
<p>“wow. who on here is even advocating for unfettered gun rights?”</p>
<p>We on CC are a genteel crowd. That’s what makes this thread remarkable IMHO … is that so many fine, intelligent, and educated law-abiders can have such divergent views on this subject … even though we all want an identical result.</p>
Pizzagirl:
I agree with many of your perspectives in other subjects on CC but using the characterization terms you’ve used in a couple of posts on this thread just illustrates your ignorance of who gun owners are and therefore diminishes any kind of point you’re trying to make. You’d likely be very surprised at just who actually owns a gun, even people within your demographic.</p>
<p>I agree that these are the questions to be answered. </p>
<p>And, I try to figure out the murder rates by strictness of state law and prevelance of ownership, but have a hard time doing so.</p>
<p>Rate of Murder with firearm:
Texas: 2.91
Ill.: 2.93
Pa. 3.97
NY: 4.12</p>
<p>Texas has the highest percentage of guns owners of these four states.</p>
<p>Is it as simple as people in dense urban areas tend to use a firearm more to kill people than those in rural areas? Appears the hicks may not be the killers.</p>
<p>Texas still has a bunch of folks living outside of high density urban areas, but has Dallas, Houston and San Antonio in the top 10 largest cities.</p>
<p>Did you notice a correlation between the high gun ownership states you just posted and the high gun murder states? </p>
<p>I think it really may be that when we discuss gun ownership in the less densely populated areas, or the areas where the owners really do hunt or live in grizzly territory, we are talking about a very different mentality around the ownership and use of firearms.</p>
<p>Plenty of people want unfettered gun rights. They take the Constitution literally (well, when it suits them). One vocal poster on this thread started with a “don’t touch my guns, dammit” rant but it seems to have been deleted.</p>
<p>And yes, there are many, many places I would rather live…places where elected officials are not owned by lobbying groups like the NRA (and as a result can’t get even common-sense legislation passed to ensure the public good). What kind of country allows a business advocacy group to “grade” legislators according to how gun-friendly they are, and then threaten to unseat them using their vast political/financial influence if they don’t toe the line? I am really, really tired of the corporate control of our government and would love to live in a country that puts its citizens first.</p>
<p>I live in the middle of a city. We are not all “hicks.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ft. Hood like all state side military bases does not allow people to carry guns on base. The only people who have guns on base are the base police. So it was in fact similar to any other work place shooting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Michael Moore is an idiot.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In many places an everyday “joe” can do just that- “pack a pistol” in a Starbucks. I carry most everywhere I go. It is my duty (not the police’s) to protect myself and my family.</p>
If that were done I think there’d be a very small number of incidents where someone picked up one of the weapons and used it to commit mass murder - probably almost no more than there are already. The gun doesn’t cause someone to commit these acts. </p>
<p>Of course, it’d be a stupid idea to stack loaded weapons of any sort (most people who use the term ‘assault weapon’ know little about weapons) in a place where they’re easily accessible by kids, especially kids who’ve had no exposure to the guns, since it’d be like asking for an accident to occur.</p>
<p>@GladGradDad, As an aside, I wish the knowledgeable gun owners here would stop disparaging those of us who know little about weapons when we simply use the language we have picked up from the national dialogue about the Second Amendment. OF COURSE we know little about the types of weapons out there–we don’t want to know about them. We wish we didn’t HAVE to know about them. “Assault weapons” and “high-capacity magazines” are terms being used to describe the types of weapons used by many of the recent mass shooters, and are in the language of proposed legislation being discussed. Even the NRA uses these descriptions. There’s no need to condescend.</p>
<p>“Of course, it’d be a stupid idea to stack loaded weapons of any sort in a place where they’re easily accessible by kids …”</p>
<p>OK, that’s a start. Now how about something (small) from the gun-control side. Let me suggest this: Since there are already 300 Million legally-owned guns in America, prohibiting future gun sales (as the sole measure to reduce gun violence) will have virtually no effect for years … if not decades.</p>
<p>Gosh, I can think of a whole list of countries I’d rather live in, not only because they have strict gun laws, but because they have UHC, great maternity benefits, free education though university - along with all the freedoms we have here such as - freedom of speech, the press, religion, etc., etc., etc. </p>
<p>I have no idea why people think the US is such a great place to live.</p>
<p>That’s an interesting perspective. My husband has talked about leaving the country from time to time. But, every time we’ve looked into it, the truth is that the US turns out to be better in so many ways.</p>
<p>Sally, I haven’t seen the post you see referring to. But I have to tell you, there has been PLENTY of rude and condescending language going the other direction as well. It’s easy for a minority, in a setting, who feels oppressed to become a bit shrill and defensive…not that it’s right. In fact, I’m done with this thread. I don’t think I have anything new to offer, and I don’t believe that I am understood well by most others on the thread. The topic is, admittedly, not one I would be willing to compromise on anyway. It’s too important to me. And that doesn’t make me a hick or a nut or uneducated, all of which I have been called here.</p>
<p>All reasons for gun ownership are not the same.</p>
<p>I am originally from northern Wisconsin. My family, DH’s family and many people I grew up with in my small hometown owned guns. The NRA back then was a benevelent organization that sponsored gun safety classes. People took hunting seriously. I hunted ducks, geese and pheasants. I grew up around hunting dogs. In the late fall it was common to see deer and bird carcases hanging from trees to age. The state teacher conference was scheduled during deer season, because, frankly, most of the teachers and high school boys would have been absent that week anyway.</p>
<p>I once (40 years ago) was a passenger in a car that clipped the back legs of a deer that tried to leap away from us off a country road one winter night. The boy I was with drove to the nearest farm house. He and the farmer (who was a stranger) tracked the deer half a mile through the snow to shoot it. It was the right thing to do, and nobody ever thought twice about it. It also never occured to either of us that the farmer wouldn’t have a gun, wouldn’t be willing to help, or that it would be dangerous to ask a stranger to get his gun and take a nighttime walk into the woods with us to kill an injured deer.</p>
<p>In all honesty, this is not the kind of culture, guns, people or ammunition that ANYONE is talking about when gun regulation is discussed, and I am tired of reading that it is. </p>
<p>I wish we could agree as a country that we are NOT concerned about the hunters. And I wish the hardliners could acknowledge that the responsible gun owners I grew up with would overwhelmingly agree that gun registration, licensing, required insurance coverage, waiting periods, and background checks would not impede their ability to protect their farms, hunt, or practice their sport.</p>