CT tragedy

[Richard L]

Redfish,

What you buy at Home Depot to make explosives is very different than Military Grade explosives...but the end results may be similar. Military explosives are smaller and lighter and give much more bang per pound than mixing up hardware store chemicals.



I feel that slowing down the reloading process and limiting the number of round a weapons can hold, you will slow down their rate of fire and that will allow some time for people to escape and the police to arrive. It certainly will not stop him from killing the first 6 victims, but with a smaller magazine and a slower reload time, he won't be able to beat any of the exiting records.



Eddie,

Why do you need a rifle that can hold more than 6 rounds? Under what reasonable condtions would you need to rapidly fire more than 6 shots....if even that many? If you are proficient with that weapon you will only need one shot, whether you are hunting or defending yourself. If you cannot hit something with 6 shots, you probably shouldn't even own the rifle because you are going to kill innocent people with your wild shooting spree.



By the way, where do you hide your Red Rider BB gun...:grin: Be careful because you can put someone's eye out with that....:bwahaha:



...Richard

 

[EddieS'04]

Why do you need a rifle that can hold more than 6 rounds? Under what reasonable condtions would you need to rapidly fire more than 6

Though it is nice not to constantly load up. When target plinking.

I confess. My 22 long rifle mag holds 25 rounds......Fun to quik shot at multiple targets.

Kinda of a sport thing. Dont worry Im sane....I think...:bwahaha:

 

[Robert Thomas]

Last report has the rifle in the trunk of the car. Not that it matters.



Eddie. You are as old as me. Sanity is fading.



Rich. Thanks for the information on military explosives.

 

[H D]

I knew this would become the discussion.



An Aspergers child did not receive the care he needed. The conditions of his disease were so neglected that an irrational behavior occurred and a national tragedy transpired.



Let's talk about the easy thing to do. Let's ban something. That has solved every other major "dangerous" thing in the U.S. Things like alcohol, marijuana, other drugs, homosexual activities, etc. I bet you I could go out and get any of these things within 24 hours if I tried. A few of these banned items or activities may even be legal in your state. At least one is in every state after an unsuccessful ban, alcohol. But banning something is easy, isn't it. It'll make someone feel better for a minute. Won't solve a dang thing, but we can say we tried something, right?



How about mental health? That's not something easy to tackle, now is it? That's what's involved in every instance such as this, though. A mentally healthy person does not commit acts like this. The tool used is irrelevant. The bottom line is mental instability is the root cause of the shooting. If the guns were 100% unobtainable, would this event have still occurred? Yes, maybe in a different fashion, but the tragedy could only have been avoided by helping the poor, suffering 17 year old who was not receiving the proper care he needed.



Argue about guns all you want. If that makes you feel like you're proposing a real solution to any perceived problem.



How do you think parents of other Aspergers children feel right now? The ones that are doing everything they can for their children to ensure they receive the care and socialization they need; how should they feel that an opportunity to bring attention to the suffering of many of our ignored mentally ill citizens has been turned into a political debate about the necessity of a particular tool? How should those with Aspergers and the parents of children with Aspergers feel that the disease is treated more as an example as to why a certain gun can or can't be responsibly owned in the U.S. instead of recognizing the difficulties of the disease?



People are hurting and it's not because of a particular type of gun. It's because we fail to help hurting humans. The shooter was ill and untreated; that's the problem. Many other mentally ill Americans will continue suffering. Some may commit similar tragedies in the future with any number of deadly methods. The vast majority will not; most will suffer in silence. I'm ashamed of our country and inability to tackle the real issue when it's right in front of us. Everything is now a political football and it is a shame.



Mental illness is the cause of many deaths each year. Depression is stigmatized. Suicide is given a half-hearted 1-800-help line. A majority of our homeless have mental illness. Too bad we can't just ban these things, right? Cause then like everything else we ban, it just goes away.



But whatever, just continue to ignore the real issue. The other is more media friendly and politically easy. I'm embarrassed to predict this discussion will continue to be about guns.:sad:

 

[Robert Thomas]

Hugh,



You are of course right. I think that beyond those individuals that take any big incident and seek to politicize it for their own gain, much like a freak storm being a example of global warming, individuals tend to look for a cause for all incidents. People want everything bad that happens to be someones fault and something that can be corrected. This gives individuals a sense that they are safe, something is being being done, and the same thing cannot happen to them.



In the case of this Post the topic ended up at firearms because of two reasons; first this is the only flowing information presented thus far from the shooting and the fact that the President made it an issue, secondly the discussion was driven by a few of individuals that felt that they had something to contribute to the overall gun control subject. This has not been a Gun Control argument as much as a idea discussion.



The Post should be expanded to express those views that you expressed, protection of students, police responses, video games, and the media's reaction to the event. It is other's responsibility to expand the discussion. I personally didn't go there because I don't know anything about those aspects to offer meaningful information.

 

[H D]

I take it pretty personally when one of my Constitutional rights is questioned because of an incident which could have been prevented with more sensible political attention on the underlying issue to a problem.



I offered my opinion of what constitutes the real issue here as an attempt to have discussion of what I think is the real issue. I don't really want to have to defend my Constitutional rights and why I might want one particular gun or another. I won't discuss on the internet what guns I own or would consider owning, but I will tell you that none of my gun purchases have or will have anything to do with ever having one pointed at another human. I do understand their usefulness if such an event should it be necessary, though.



Our desire to help those with mental illness seems to be severely outweighed by the desire to either ban or own particular guns. It is very evident in what the entire discussion throughout the nation seems to revolve around. That just seems inappropriate to me.

 

[Richard L]

Hugh,

OK, lets do it your way...Let's ban people with mental problems. Gee that was easy.



The problem is that we have no way of knowing which people will do these things until after they do them. And nobody wants to turn in a family member who may be acting a little strange or may have been diagnosed with some metal issues so they are protected and just assumed to be loners and a little different until they get their hands on an Assault rifle. Some of them are perfectly normal until something snaps...so there are not necessarily any warning signs.



Even if you could identify some trait that they could potentially become violent, all we could do is bann them from buying or owning a gun, but that does not mean they could never get their hands on an Assault weapon.



Why are some people able to watch a violent movie and not be effected, while another person can watch the same violent movie and tnen decided to go out an kill a bunch of people.



Until we can figure out the cause of the brain short-circuit or be able to easily find and identify people with this kind of disorder we can only try to reduce the chances they will have to get access to these weapons.



Which brings me back to one of my original questions that nobody has really answered. What is the rational reason why any civilian needs an Assault weapon. Why does any civilian need a gun capable of shooting 20-30 rounds off without reloading. There is no sporting or game hunting situation that required that kind of fire power I really have to question the mental state of anyone who feels the need to own an Assault rifle then defends their rights or desire to own an Assault rifle without giving a rational, legitimate,and coherent reason why?



The only function of an Assault weapons to mow down as many people in as little time as possible.... It is nothing to do with the fact that any gun can be used to kill people, it's the rapid fire rate, the high number of rounds that can be loaded, and the quick reloading that makes Assault rifles far more deadly than other guns. In everyone of these mass killings, an Assault weapon (rifle or handgun) has been used and allowed the shooter to continue shooting and reloading to extract the maximum amount of carnage.



...Rich

 

[Robert Thomas]

Rich,



Just to understand your position. A assault weapon is any firearm with a magazine over 6 round?

Under 6 rounds is classified as a weapon that you can justify having and not consider owner an individual with a questionable mental state.

 

[H D]

OK, lets do it your way...Let's ban people with mental problems. Gee that was easy.

I never said that. Read closely; I don't think banning things makes them disappear.







From the CDC, 2011:



"Number of deaths for leading causes of death



Heart disease: 599,413

Cancer: 567,628

Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353

Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842

Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021

Alzheimer's disease: 79,003

Diabetes: 68,705

Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692

Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935

Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909"



Homicide by firearm 11,493. I'm not going to extrapolate how many of those were by so-called "assault" weapons. If you think it's a huge percentage, go ahead and find the statistics for that.



I look at this information and three of the top ten causes for death are related to mental health. Quick math shows ~247k died from mental health deficiencies. Homicide by firearm is less than 5% of the number that die of mental illness. Taking it down to the number of "assault" weapon deaths in comparison to mental health related deaths should give you a more proper perspective.



Keep chasing the topics given to you, though. If a ban makes you "feel" safer, regardless of reality, then I guess giving up rights is just a small price for your imaginary safety. If a 30 round magazine infuriates you more than a child suffering with Aspergers without proper medical attention, then I guess we have nothing more to discuss on this topic. You'll get your weapons bans but people will continue to suffer and 37,000 people a year will have such horrible mental anguish that they will commit suicide, many of them with a single shot from a 6 round pistol.

 

[H D]

Rich,



Just to understand your position. A assault weapon is any firearm with a magazine over 6 round?

Under 6 rounds is classified as a weapon that you can justify having and not consider owner an individual with a questionable mental state.

Rich just conveniently lumps everyone who owns a high capacity clip into the same category as mass murderers with mental health issues.

 

[Robert Thomas]

2010



Approximately. 1700 deaths of children age 5 to 9



Number one cause. About 750 accidents



Number four. 111 homicide

 

[Robert Howell]

600,000 from heart disease and 11,500 from homicide. Americans have a 5200 percent greater chance of keeling over from heart disease than being killed in a homicide according to the the above stats but people do little to reduce the risk factors such as exercise, reducing obesity and eating healthy.

I really do believe the media hype is mostly to blame; catering to an agenda.

 

[EddieS'04]

I really have to question the mental state of anyone who feels the need to own an Assault rifle then defends their rights or desire to own an Assault rifle without giving a rational, legitimate,and coherent reason why?

Rich, You have your right to your opinion. We have the right to disagree.

I do think it is off target to question someones mental stabilty. Because they choose to own one.

In that case I could question someones mental stability. If they choose to build a street car that will run 9 second time slips. Despite they have the sense to drive properly on the street. That maybe a dumb evaluation, but there are some that do think that way. I hear things like. My God they are going to run over someone. Their stupid to burn that much gas, polluting my air...My wife us to tell me I drove my 'stang on the street like an old man...LOL. I had to question why she kept getting ticket for faiure to stop or yeild...LOL



Dont get me wrong I dont take offense to your opinion. To you they are valid. The same as I think mine are valid. With my 22, when I go to the country and set up multiple targets that are designed for 22 caliber rifles. To me it is a sport of the hit miss. Nice not to have to stop every 6 rounds. I will stupidly compare it to horse shoes, golf or darts. The difference is a bullit is more deadly.



I think there are more that are mentaly stabile that enjoy the sport of shooting target. Than those that think of taking human target. Yes I do wonder why some want a 30 round 5.56 or 7.62. Their choice, Im not their judge. I will question a civilians need for fully auto.



Forgive me if I sound defensive, I dont mean to be, but. I think Hugh hit the nail on the head. It is not the tool. It is the person, not to sound patronizing. We all know that. We can only pass laws that deal with consequenses for unrightous behavior. Cant pass laws that give someone a moral compass. If that person is warped enough. They will find a way to mass destruct.



Over all I will defend the rights of someone to own or hate guns. If the day comes that changes the gun laws. I may not like it, but I will abide by it.



The only mental state of a person I will judge, is. Someone that is perverted in ways' that the majority of the world says is wrong. Or someone that continously breaks the law, and dont care. Reason for that opinion. Whether someone believe in God or not. Somethings are taught to us. Also as we come into adult hood. I believe there is somewhat of a moral compass, within us anyway. I have known a few in my life that I had to question their sanity, though they were likable and seemed sane. For those that I seen behavior that may lead to trouble. I had to walk away, even though they were likable.



As Hugh said, there are those that need the help. That cant get it. Im appalled at the lack of most medical policies. When it comes to mental health. As much as family members that shun and try to ignore it. I also question some of the games for the developing mind of a minors. IMO, too much realism. In the wrong hands. I think it can develop a warped sense of empathy and caring towards our neighbor. Maybe Im wrong, but. I think the rapid realism, can cause being angry. To turn to instant rage. I personaly never liked or played those type of games. If someone does. I only question the mental state of a young developing mind, and the adult. That thinks it is ok for thier kid.



We may never know all. Iam curiuos to the video games this kid grew up playing. Especialy with his mental background. War is real and after 'Nam I hope I never have to take a life again. Even in self defense. Life is a gift from God and precious.

Sometimes I wonder if our world will put us all back to defending our country. Hope not...

Have you ever wondered if an armed population. Has been a reason, our borders have never been attacked by forgien solders? Mostly before high tech defense systems.

 

[H D]

A common part of Aspergers is the inability to empathize or read emotion. No video games or anything else to blame on this one, either. The kid needed professional medical mental help. He did not get it.



To be clear, I am not blaming Aspergers, either. There are thousands of Americans with Aspergers that do not commit any violent acts, let alone mass murders. I just think that professional attention with this kid may have saved many lives and created a more enjoyable life for the kid who only saw one way out of his lonely world.

 

[EddieS'04]

Rich just conveniently lumps everyone who owns a high capacity clip into the same category as mass murderers with mental health issues.

It could be his opinion. Or maybe he is playing devils advocate. To see what some of us will say in defensivness......:banghead:

 

[Richard L]

Hugh, Redfish,



I can only ask the same question that nobody has even attempted to answer:

What is the rational reason why any civilian needs an Assault weapon. Why does any civilian need a military designed gun capable of rapidly shooting 20-30 rounds without reloading.

Until that question is answered, you are just mincing words, dodging the issue and throwing out statistics that do not address the fundamental source of the problem.... Nobody can justify the need for a military style Assault rifle with a high rate of fire, so why do you argue that they should not be banned?



Civilians are not allowed to own military grade explosives. Civilians are not allowed to own grenades, mines and all sorts of other military weapons and hardware...all for good reasons. Why not Assault weapons?



Also the caliber and velocity of the Assault weapons is pretty devastating when coupled with a high rate of fire, so perhaps a ban on larger magazine capacities for any weapon over limit based on caliber or muzzle velocity. The number of rounds could be 6 rounds, 10 rounds or 3 rounds? I chose 6 because it sounds like a reasonable number. Some will argue that's not enough and others will argue that 6 is still too much. All I am saying is that anything that would slow down the firing rate would help some people escape from these kinds of shootings.



Nobody has yet to tell me a reasonable, rational reason why you would need more than 6 rounds for any legal hunting or sporting purpose, or even for home protection...Unless you are expecting a horde of 50 crazed drug addicts to storm your house..but that would not be reasonable or rational now would it?



...Rich

 

[H D]

Because there is no such thing as an assault rifle.



Have you ever been hog hunting? Have you ever been squirrel hunting? Have you ever been target shooting? Or are you just spouting off an opinion on something you know nothing about? As you already stated, the number of rounds is an arbitrary opinion. What makes you the authority that "knows" X# of rounds is only for murderous psychos?



Why do you argue that a ban will keep them out of the hands of those who wish to do harm when there is more evidence that bans on items do not work. It doesn't even matter how much money is thrown at the ban; it doesn't work.



Why do you prefer to take guns away from people rather than attack the real issue of mental health?



If the top legal speed limit in the U.S. is 80, why should any vehicles be made capable of going more than 80? It's obviously unsafe and not necessary for normal, sane drivers. Having safe, designated areas for driving fast cars obviously can't work if we use the same logic applied to guns by you. No person ever has a need to go 1/4 of a mile in 10 seconds. I doubt anyone ever needs to go 1/4 mile in less than 18 seconds. That sounds like a reasonable cut off. So, there's the ban I propose. No cars that can accelerate through 1/4 mile in less than 18 seconds or go above 80 are allowed. This is retroactive as well, so anyone that currently has such vehicles must turn them in and have them crushed.



Why don't you explain to me why you would need a vehicle to exceed those specs? If you can't, the obvious response is a ban on such vehicles. After all, more deaths occur as a result of assault vehicles every year than assault rifles. There is a direct correlation between speed and death in car accidents. Ban speed because there might be a few individuals that act irresponsibly. Only a psycho who wants to endanger people would want a car that could dangerously accelerate on public roads. Why does anyone other than someone intent on illegally speeding need a car that can accelerate through the 1/4 mile at 12 seconds?



I gave you three instances of when someone completely mentally stable would desire more than six rounds. If you do not understand that, you obviously know nothing about the subject. Would you answer my questions now, even the similarly ridiculous last one?

 

[H D]

This is my main question, though:





Why do you prefer to take guns away from people rather than attack the real issue of mental health?

 

[EddieS'04]

Hugh,

While we are on the subject. Can you think of a rational reason. To own a lexus, mercedes, collecting old disabled military tanks, or any car that cost over $10K. There realy isnt one...:bwahaha: All anyone realy needs is dependable ride from A to B.



Oh could it be because I want one and I can. But there again our lives are full of irrational things every day. That are only wrong if imoral or unlawful. Isnt it great that are not required to be clones.



I dont think we need to rationalize anything we want. As long as it is legal. Be a asault type gun or a piggy bank. I will say what is irational of ownership is. If our toy's or hobbies, rob food, shelter, security from our family. That needs justification, to the family, but not to me. If Im not in your family. Including a legal activity.



I really think when a person is put on the spot of justifying what is legal and not imoral. They have the funds, and their plan is to no do harm. No one has the right to judge or ask for justification or reasoning.



Boils down to because I can, I want one and it is not, imoral or unlawful. So there is nothing wrong with it. Not for me to judge and make every one be like me. Just because I like it or want it. Well, we all have things that are not wrong. That others dont like.



This whole thing of asking anyone justify a legal activity. That IMO even God has no problem with it, is senseless itself.



This is starting to remind me of my early young church life. God wont love me if I dont get a haircut. God wont love me if I dont dress like you when I go to church. God wont love me...da-da-da.



Unless someone does something unlawful, illegal, etc. No one has the right to make you justify your opinion. That is what Jesus was trying to teach the world. Judge the wrongful actions of the individual, not the person. I will not put someone on the judgemental, justifation hot seat. To hope to make them see it my way.



This conversation of I dont have the correct answer or the answer of the opinion wanted here. Has turned fruitless and judgemental....JMHO....



So why keep asking the same question. When you dont get the answer that agree's with your own opinion.



This thread is just getting too weird and controling for me to continue.:cheeky:



Peace brothers. May the love of God help us all to filter out judgement and justification. From all of our individual opinions about anything that is not wrong. Or has no fore thought intention to do harm.



Merry Christmas and Be blessed with the love of Christ, this coming year.

 

[Bill V]

I'm not pro-gun nor am I anti-gun. I am a father of two little girls. And I say- if you are a principal in any school in this country and you don't have a handgun stashed away in your desk or in a filing cabinet in your office that only you know about, you should be F*&^ing fired on the spot!

I'm not pro-gun nor am I anti-gun. I am a father of one little girl and two little boys. And I say- if you are a principal in any school in this country and you have a handgun stashed away anywhere in your office, you should be F*&^ing fired, and arrested, on the spot!



Looks like between the two of us, if we were to have our way, every principal in America would be canned.



If a principal has a gun stashed, as you propose--if it isn't properly secured, it's going to fall into the wrong hands, and have far more likely chances of causing bad than good. And if it is properly secured, the time it would have taken to get it unsecured would have been great enough that the events of last week would not have been stopped. Either way, no good comes from its presence.