Tell me what part of an AWB would've prevented Newtown? The guns are already out there, and will continue to be - and in fairly large quantities. There are AR-15s and 30rounders all over the country. I know people who bought some, who I never expected to even own a gun.

12/22/2012 1:06:57 PM

is it legal for civis to sell their weapons to just anybody?

12/22/2012 2:25:02 PM

^Varies by state and type of weapon. In NC pistols require a pistol purchase permit, unless you have a CCP, in which case you have already done the same background checks to clear you for it. Rifles and shotguns are cool to just sell or trade. Fully auto weapons are MUCH more difficult and expensive to purchase. Gotta have a Class 3 license, which has to get signed off by the sheriff, so it really depends on what county you are in.

[Edited on December 22, 2012 at 2:39 PM. Reason : ]

12/22/2012 2:39:38 PM

^ class 3 is to be a dealer of NFA items. You fill out a from one or form four and pay the tax to purchase and own.

12/22/2012 4:49:08 PM

^x4 I'm wishing I had bought one before prices shot up.

Although I've been noticing that even some of the NY Times' editorial staff realize how dumb it is to ban cosmetic/ergonomic features. I'd put my money on AR-15's still being legal a year from now, but magazines limited limited to 10-rounds. And probably stricter rules re: sales.

That or nothing at all; if the Republicans don't mind stonewalling their way off the fiscal cliff, then I don't see them rolling over for something like this, months after the public's attention has moved on.

12/22/2012 5:11:45 PM

3 good pieces on the assault weapon issue:


http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/17/there-s-little-we-can-do-to-prevent-another-massacre.html


http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

12/23/2012 10:52:34 PM

I'd be a lot more receptive to the common refrain of "we need guns to resist tyranny!" if gun lovers actually used their guns to do just that.

But they never do.

12/23/2012 11:37:51 PM

I agree with that daily beast article that the only gun ban that would significantly reduce the chances of this happening again is a 100% ban on all guns, which isn't going to happen.

A proper response would be some serious introspection on why violence and suicide in the US is much higher than it should be compared to other industrialized nations, and then to identify some meaningful solutions to change the culture for the better.

12/23/2012 11:38:42 PM

^ I don't agree with that. Particularly this part in the article:

Quote :

" Since we can't understand it, we can't change it."

It's a common fallacy for people to presume that just because something is beyond their comprehension, it must be beyond comprehension. This is how religions propagate.

This issue CAN be understand, it's not the product of "pure evil," and things can be done if we analyze the chain of events and look for where reasonable policies could be enacted.

12/24/2012 3:27:04 AM

^such as?

12/24/2012 8:54:16 AM

He may or may not be able to respond to that, but if he can't, that doesn't mean that someone with experience and credentials analyzing social phenomena or outbreaks is unable to respond to that. That's kind of his point.

12/24/2012 9:24:49 AM

I think it would be very hard to predict what sets off a crazy person. Whether it is a video game, song, chatroom, bully, his mom telling him to eat his peas, whatever. It would be even harder to enact policies that would stop it. imo

In the end they will rush something through to look like they are doing something that will have little to no impact on preventing this crap.

12/24/2012 9:57:01 AM

^^ I think that maybe some incremental gains could be made by strengthening the background check system some more, but in general, that article is pretty good. There are no solutions. There are a couple of little things we could do that may produce modest improvements.

12/24/2012 10:00:47 AM

ban peas

12/24/2012 10:17:21 AM

^ban everything. We gotta do SOMETHING man. lol

I did think the NRAs idea of school design was pretty good and was blown over for the headlines about cops in schools. Having more/better exit doors so these kids can get out of these situations seems like a good idea.

[Edited on December 24, 2012 at 10:23 AM. Reason : .]

12/24/2012 10:22:53 AM

Ban gasoline.... and fertilizer....


and batteries...


and lighters...


and natural gas...

and .... fuck people crazy people can kill you with anything... stop being stupid.
fix the crazies not the tools they use.

12/24/2012 12:12:18 PM

^exactly

12/24/2012 12:13:19 PM

My thought was if you were allowed to punch someone for being a douche bag i don't think it would ever get to "fuck it kill'em all" stage.

12/24/2012 12:28:19 PM

This is just me, maybe I'm crazy, I dunno.

But I'd rather force a crazy person to jump through a few hoops before they go on a murderous rampage.


I don't know, I'm weird like that.

12/24/2012 12:44:34 PM

you're just steering them to the path of least resistance....

this time guns... next time bombs...


ohh wait... IEDs can be made at lowes with no red flags at all....


your hoops are insignificant.

How about this thought... drugs have been illegal forever... there are no drugs that are "grandfathered in" in anyway... you know where the easiest places to get drugs are... highschools and bus terminals.

not too many hoops there.

I'm good for having a concealed carry permit like permit to purchase assault weapons to keep the crazies out... but banning ar 15s and high cap pistols now that there are sporting events centered around them (see 3 gun competition & most pistol comps) is like taking away track shoes because they scratch the mall floor and give thieves an unfair advantage... anything used improperly can be used to commit crimes...


[Edited on December 24, 2012 at 12:54 PM. Reason : .]

12/24/2012 12:50:46 PM

Quote :

"I think it would be very hard to predict what sets off a crazy person. "

If we take this path, then yes we will have a difficult time; however if we use this as a starting point to a broader discussion about violence in the US, we could make some inroads.

But...

Quote :

"In the end they will rush something through to look like they are doing something that will have little to no impact on preventing this crap."

This is what we will get. Which is really sad.

12/24/2012 12:57:35 PM

^^I don't really know how to respond to all that. It seems like a collection of loose thoughts.

Quote :

"I'm good for having a concealed carry permit like permit to purchase assault weapons to keep the crazies out... but banning ar 15s and high cap pistols now that there are sporting events centered around them (see 3 gun competition & most pistol comps) is like taking away track shoes because they scratch the mall floor and give thieves an unfair advantage... anything used improperly can be used to commit crimes... "

Yeah, that part is particularly stupid. It's sad, because you probably view this as a legitimate counter point to an argument I never made. You see, track shoes are not specifically designed to kill things. Guns are. So you're "ban everything" argument is moot, and only serves to isolate any serious discussion into a sphere of absurdity (which is your intended goal, whether you'll admit to it or not).

There obviously should be bounds of reason when it comes to the discussion of regulation. How do you regulate something that is potentially severely dangerous to the general public without infringing on personal rights? It's a goddamn shame that conversation is never had on this board, though. Instead, every discussion devolves into an all-or-nothing ideological battle.

12/24/2012 1:07:38 PM

Yes, clearly anyone regardless of cognitive ability or technical skill can build and conceal a bomb MacGyver style to kill dozens of people with. That shit is easy. Those Columbine kids sure killed a bunch of people with bombs. Oh wait, no they didn't. They either failed to detonate or didn't hurt anyone when they did because they were built by stupid fucking kids who were incapable of building a decent bomb. They were easily able to murder a dozen people with guns though.

[Edited on December 24, 2012 at 1:11 PM. Reason : :]

12/24/2012 1:09:28 PM

Quote :

"How about this thought... drugs have been illegal forever... there are no drugs that are "grandfathered in" in anyway... you know where the easiest places to get drugs are... highschools and bus terminals. "

I don't get the connection between acquiring illegal drugs and acquiring illegal guns. Dealing with my pothead dorm mate in college was a relatively benign experience compared to what I imagine a transaction with a black market arms dealer to be.

[Edited on December 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM. Reason : .]

12/24/2012 1:14:26 PM

Quote :

"Ban gasoline.... and fertilizer.... and batteries... and lighters... and natural gas... and .... fuck people crazy people can kill you with anything... stop being stupid."

Most crazy people are impulsive and just decide they want to kill people. They don't go through preparations aside from grabbing the guns and maybe some smoke grenades and driving to the place they want to shoot up.

They don't start 8 months out figuring out how to build a bomb, get supplies, make a bomb, test it, figure out how to get it into the place they want to attack without being seen, then finally plant the bomb.

Quote :

"fix the crazies not the tools they use."

Ok, cure all mental disorders before they can be seen, that sounds do-able

Quote :

"you're just steering them to the path of least resistance...."

You're steering them down a path with a lot of resistance. One with a lot of time to consider the impact of their actions, and a lot of time and opportunities to be noticed earlier.

12/24/2012 4:20:05 PM

Quote :

"Most crazy people are impulsive and just decide they want to kill people. They don't go through preparations aside from grabbing the guns and maybe some smoke grenades and driving to the place they want to shoot up. They don't start 8 months out figuring out how to build a bomb, get supplies, make a bomb, test it, figure out how to get it into the place they want to attack without being seen, then finally plant the bomb."

Honest question. I keep hearing this over and over, but does the evidence actually bear this out? For these sorts of mentally unstable mass killings, are they really spontaneous or are they more methodically planned out? Off the top of my head I note that the current killer destroyed his computer before going on his rampage. The columbine killers were clearly planning for quite a while. The VT shooter waited a month between acquiring his first and second gun, recorded a series of video manifestos over the nearly 2 months from first purchase to massacre (http://www.governor.virginia.gov/TempContent/techPanelReport.cfm). Loughner bought his gun in November, for an attack committed in January. The Aurora shooter started buying in May for his attack in July.

Now sure these are shorter time spans than "8 months figuring out how to build a bomb", but they're also not spontaneous "grabbing the guns ... and driving", and with most of these shooters, the evidence of becoming unhinged was (at least with hind sight) there long before they even started acquiring their weapons.

12/24/2012 4:37:30 PM

I do see what you are saying, and I suppose they might be much less impulsive than I said, but I believe you'd have to agree that it takes a lot more to make a bomb, quite possibly more than an insane person might be able to manage. I would also guess that a bomb is much less satisfying to them, thus why we see a lot of gun related spree killings over explosive spree killings.

12/24/2012 5:09:28 PM

^^It's also important to consider all the other murders committed regularly in this country by gunfire.

Reasonable gun control could reduce the likelihood of people getting shot for stepping on someone's shoes, sleeping with someone else's wife, or for getting into an argument at a college football tailgate.

The easier you make it to get a hold of a gun, the easier you make it for frivolous murders (and robberies, for that matter) to occur.

The debate of gun control should not exist solely around the conditions of mass murders, especially when there's already a slew of every day crimes committed and enabled by lax gun laws from people who are not mentally unstable.

[Edited on December 24, 2012 at 6:05 PM. Reason : ]

12/24/2012 5:38:43 PM

Quote :

" I do see what you are saying, and I suppose they might be much less impulsive than I said, but I believe you'd have to agree that it takes a lot more to make a bomb, quite possibly more than an insane person might be able to manage."

Certainly possible for some, but I'm not sure I'd say most. Explosives aren't that hard to make, and the first mass school killing was done with explosives and fire. And a simple examination of the Middle East will show how effective insane people with bombs can be. The thing to bear in mind is that insane doesn't mean stupid, it just means something isn't wired right. Especially combined with the level of obsession that tends to show up in these sorts of people and I don't think bombs are significantly beyond them.

Quote :

" I would also guess that a bomb is much less satisfying to them, thus why we see a lot of gun related spree killings over explosive spree killings."

Well it is trendy, and I recently saw a phrase which I think rings very true to describe these current mass shootings "suicide by mass media event". Recently these guys have killed or tried to kill themselves at the end of their spree, and it seems pretty obvious that they didn't really have an exit or escape planned. These guys are looking to make a giant splash and "show the world" in whatever way makes sense to them. And what better way to generate a mass of media attention than with images and stories of people running and cowering before you in fear. And when I say trendy, I'm not being glib either. Consider, if you asked the average American what form of mass killing they were afraid of before 1998, I'd venture to say that it would have been a bombing. Between the failed WTC bombing in 93, the Unabomber, the federal building and the Olympic Games, before 98 bombs were the hot thing. Even the columbine killers planned on using bombs as their main attack, the guns were supposed to be plan B if I recall correctly.

Quote :

"Reasonable gun control could reduce the likelihood of people getting shot for stepping on someone's shoes, sleeping with someone else's wife, or for getting into an argument at a college football tailgate. The easier you make it to get a hold of a gun, the easier you make it for frivolous murders (and robberies, for that matter) to occur."

Two questions: What additional "reasonable gun control" do you envision that will stop those listed crimes (and stepping on someone's shoes? Really?)? Then, what percentage of these regular gun deaths are attributable to these random crimes of passion as opposed to deliberate methodical killings?

12/24/2012 6:55:26 PM

Quote :

"What additional "reasonable gun control" do you envision that will stop those listed crimes"

I don't have an answer off the top of my head, but I'm willing to have that discussion, which is a far cry more than those who would rather sit there and pretend that gun violence is a non-issue in this country.

Quote :

"and stepping on someone's shoes? Really?"

Yes. Really. People get into gunfights all the time in this country over the most benign arguments. Arguments that would otherwise result in fisticuffs often lead to bodybags.

Quote :

"Then, what percentage of these regular gun deaths are attributable to these random crimes of passion as opposed to deliberate methodical killings?"

Does it matter? They're both murder by gunfire. If the goal is to lower the number of fatalities by gunfire every year, then distinguishing from the different "types" is a pointless exercise. And honestly, your categorization of "regular gun deaths" just highlights how engrained gun culture is in this country. That you so passively dismiss it as somehow irrelevant or less worthy of reform really demonstrates how lopsided our priorities are.





"YOU WIN SOME, YOU LOSE SOME! BUT YOU LIVE! YOU LIVE TO FIGHT ANOTHER DAY!"




[Edited on December 24, 2012 at 7:18 PM. Reason : ]

12/24/2012 7:14:17 PM

Quote :

"I don't have an answer off the top of my head, but I'm willing to have that discussion, which is a far cry more than those who would rather sit there and pretend that gun violence is a non-issue in this country."

Part of your problem might be that you keep trying to frame the problem as an issue of guns, when its far more likely to be a problem with violence in general. To many, it's about as facetious as the NRA declaring that its all about the media because they found some correlations.

Quote :

"Yes. Really. People get into gunfights all the time in this country over the most benign arguments. Arguments that would otherwise result in fisticuffs often lead to bodybags. "

Again do you have any statistics to support this assertion at all? Because right now, it sounds more like the same "blood in the streets" arguments that get trotted out every time some state looks to change carry laws, and that never seem to come to pass.

Quote :

"Does it matter? They're both murder by gunfire. If the goal is to lower the number of fatalities by gunfire every year, then distinguishing from the different "types" is a pointless exercise."

Except the goal isn't to reduce the number of fatalities by gunfire, it's to reduce the number of fatalities period. This is the problem many 2A supporters have with these discussions on gun control, they focus on the wrong thing. It is no more preferable that people die from stabbings or bludgeoning than it is for them to die by gunshot. To focus solely on the method of death as opposed to the reason and how it fits into the larger violence levels throughout the country suggests an interest not in actually solving the real problem, just eliminating guns. So yes, it does matter.

Quote :

"And honestly, your categorization of "regular gun deaths" just highlights how engrained gun culture is in this country. That you so passively dismiss it as somehow irrelevant or less worthy of reform really demonstrates how lopsided our priorities are."

Excuse me, the regular gun deaths line was based on your words, to whit: "all the other murders committed regularly in this country by gunfire."

12/24/2012 7:42:46 PM

I used "regularly" describe the frequency of gun fatalities in this country. Your use of "regular" could be interpreted as a substitute for "normal."

And I'll find you statistics of the petty distinction you made as soon as you show me evidence suggesting that knife violence is as lethal and commonplace as gun violence.

12/24/2012 8:29:24 PM

Quote :

"And I'll find you statistics of the petty distinction you made as soon as you show me evidence suggesting that knife violence is as lethal and commonplace as gun violence."

You mean like all the statistics I provided earlier in this thread showing that gun availability doesn't strongly correlate with the homicide rate? The fact is, you haven't been at all interested in having an honest discussion about this, which is why you won't go look up the statistics to back up your own claim, nor will you go back through this thread to find the statistics I quoted. Your only intent is to antagonize, which is why you have been nothing but condescending to and about everyone who doesn't share your views. And it's why our conversation is over.

12/24/2012 9:47:25 PM

Quote :

"And a simple examination of the Middle East will show how effective insane people with bombs can be."

I wouldn't call them insane, also that's a pretty big network of people, not one person working alone. And I'll point out that Muslim terrorist groups have tried bombing attacks inside the us and have been unsuccessful.

Quote :

"What additional "reasonable gun control" do you envision that will stop those listed crimes "

I've stated my opinion, breech load rifles and shotguns. It's less stringent than most developed countries, but still allows for weapons for sporting and home defense.

12/24/2012 10:15:39 PM

Quote :

"I wouldn't call them insane, also that's a pretty big network of people, not one person working alone. And I'll point out that Muslim terrorist groups have tried bombing attacks inside the us and have been unsuccessful."

1) I'd call anyone that purposefully goes out to kill innocent people insane. Killing another human being intentionally is something that's pretty far outside an average person's mental structures. That's part of why the military does so much work to get soldiers to be able to kill, and many of them still have issues with it during and after the fact.

2) Point taken on the network.

3) Arguably their lack of success is because as far as I can tell, those terrorist groups have almost always gone for structural attacks. The two attacks on WTC being the biggest examples. OTOH, the unabomber targeted people directly, and the olympic bombings also targeted people.

Quote :

"I've stated my opinion, breech load rifles and shotguns. It's less stringent than most developed countries, but still allows for weapons for sporting and home defense."

But how do either of those restrictions prevent the 2 specific crimes he mentioned: murder for cheating and the tailgate shooting? In the case of murder for cheating, the stereotype of that event is getting blown away with a shotgun, but even if it weren't it would be just as effective, and in the case of the tailgating incident, the guy left and came back didn't he? He could bring a shotgun from home just as easily as a pistol.

12/24/2012 10:40:12 PM

Quote :

"I'd call anyone that purposefully goes out to kill innocent people insane"

Where the pilots who dropped atom bombs on Japan insane? Was everyone involved in the holocaust insane? Where the slave traders and masters all insane? That's too broad of a definition of insane.

Quote :

"Killing another human being intentionally is something that's pretty far outside an average person's mental structures. That's part of why the military does so much work to get soldiers to be able to kill, and many of them still have issues with it during and after the fact."

Murder has been around longer than humans, it's pretty far outside our society's mores, but those vary by time and culture. Most murders are not committed by insane people.

Quote :

"But how do either of those restrictions prevent the 2 specific crimes he mentioned: murder for cheating and the tailgate shooting?"

It doesn't but those aren't the crimes that make the nation stop. That legislation would be to address the multiple murder situation.

12/25/2012 12:05:18 AM

Statistically it is a non issue. But the horror of what happens sucks.... It Still happens less than people dieing in car accidents.

And 10 round guns will commit impulse murders as well or better then high capacity guns ( high cap mags jam more frequently) for whome ever made that point. The thing no one addresses is all of the grandfathered in guns. No legislature will ever pass in this country that requires actively taking away personal property.

So my point is any gun control you impart is moot and just an annoyance that drives up the price of second hand guns.

P.s. does no one realize the guns he did this with were not even his own?

I don't know it just pisses me off that our entire cunt-ry is so full of sheep and pussies that rather then protect yourselves you'd rather pay the government to nanny the guns for you with some half baked laws that just makes criminals nearly certain no one but them is as well armed as they are.

Same reason we censor tv because people don't want to take the time to accept responsibility and explain right and wrong to thier kids and recognize that wrong can be funny or entertaining in a movie but is still wrong.

As a country we need to man up, realize we live in a mean world and bad shit happens. Accept your responsibility as an adult to protect yourself and your family not push it off on someone else.

I probably have more guns than most on here and mine have only killed paper and steel... Tactical marksmanship is fun you should try it before you out law it.
And half my guns are family heirlooms some handed down as far as my great great great grandfather...

I wouldn't mind jumping through hoops to get my next ar-15 but outlawing it altogether is just shitty.
Regulate the people's ability to get guns not the guns they should be allowed to get.

Also note that the Swiss have more guns per capita than anyone else and the least amount of crime including murder. It seems that when people are worried about others shooting back they are less likely to shoot in the first place.

[Edited on December 25, 2012 at 12:28 AM. Reason : .]

12/25/2012 12:20:10 AM

Quote :

"Statistically it is a non issue. But the horror of what happens sucks.... It Still happens less than people dieing in car accidents."

We're not talking about just spree killings, limiting firearms to breech loading rifles and shotguns, it could have a much larger impact than just that. And car accidents happen at twice the rate of any kind of death due to violence, so not really a fair comparison.

Quote :

"I don't know it just pisses me off that our entire cunt-ry is so full of sheep and pussies that rather then protect yourselves you'd rather pay the government to nanny the guns for you with some half baked laws that just makes criminals nearly certain no one but them is as well armed as they are."

Wake up, it's the whole world man. It's not the 1800s anymore, you don't really need a gun, that's why most civilized countries don't allow that much of them.

12/25/2012 12:32:49 AM

But if they pass more gun control laws, how will we fight back when the North Koreans invade like in the new "Red Dawn" movie?

While that scenario is indeed unlikely, I'd venture a guess it's at least as likely as any given gun owner going on a shooting spree.

I'll always like the original "Red Dawn" better. Patrick Swayze was such a baddass slaying those commie bastards! 'MERICA!

12/25/2012 12:55:09 AM

I swear if I hear this shit about the Swiss one more time in this thread I'm going to puke a leg.

Shut the fuck up about the Swiss.

12/25/2012 1:02:56 AM

Quote :

"Where the pilots who dropped atom bombs on Japan insane?"

That's a good question. What sort of person has it within them to condemn an entire city to death. Do you think you could have pushed the button?

Quote :

"Was everyone involved in the holocaust insane?"

Those that sought to purposefully kill innocents? I would have to say so. It's worth noting that insanity does not have to be a permanent condition however.

Quote :

"Where the slave traders and masters all insane?"

Another interesting question. Insanity traditionally has to do with societal mores. So by the definition of their times, since the slaves were not considered human, I would have to say no. On the other hand, if anyone told you today that a group of humans were not actually humans because of their skin tone, you would not be remiss calling them insane.

Quote :

"Most murders are not committed by insane people."

I would argue the opposite, that very few murders are committed by sane people. The fact of the matter is, normal, well adjusted individuals don't kill other innocent people. Yes I am aware of both the milligram and the Stanford prison experiments.

Quote :

"It doesn't but those aren't the crimes that make the nation stop. That legislation would be to address the multiple murder situation."

The problem is, the crimes that make the nation stop are statistically insignificant compared to all the other crimes, that's why they make us stop. Basing your national arms policy on those few crimes would be like basing your entire airline security policies and foreign policies on a single (admittedly absolutely horrible) terrorist attack. Yes I am aware of the irony of that statement giving my past positions on some of those issues. We all acknowledge the TSA is nothing but security theater, and it's at least debatable as to whether we are any safer today than we were 10 years ago. Why then is it so hard to see or imagine that new gun control policies might also just be more theater that doesn't actually solve the problem?

Quote :

"Wake up, it's the whole world man. It's not the 1800s anymore, you don't really need a gun, that's why most civilized countries don't allow that much of them."

And why don't you need a gun anymore? As you point out, murder has been around long before guns, and while all crime is down (at least in the us), I don't see murder going away anytime soon. Beyond that, Katrina showed us that our fellow human beings are not likely to maintain large amounts of law and order when society's infrastructure breaks down. Finally, do you suspect that governments today are inherently more trustworthy with a monopoly on force than governments of old? Even if you trust your current government, do you trust the next one that will take over? Your grandparents should remember a time when the world thought all of Europe might be learning German for the foreseeable future. Just recently we were directly involved in two government changes. And while we would all like to imagine the US will continue forever, history suggests that won't happen. It may not be in our lifetimes, but then I imagine every generation says that. So other than the fact that your government (who by the way is no stranger to killing) says you don't need guns (even as they themselves continue to arm) why do you think you don't at the very least have a legitimate right to them?

12/25/2012 1:10:59 AM

Quote :

"This is just me, maybe I'm crazy, I dunno. But I'd rather force a crazy person to jump through a few hoops before they go on a murderous rampage. I don't know, I'm weird like that."

Killing your mom and stealing her guns sounds like one helluva hoop. Didnt stop this guy. I know you are weird like that and all, but what additional piece of paper/form to fill out do you think would have helped in this situation?

12/25/2012 6:03:37 AM

Quote :

" Most crazy people are impulsive and just decide they want to kill people. They don't go through preparations aside from grabbing the guns and maybe some smoke grenades and driving to the place they want to shoot up."

Citation needed. I know for a fact Columbine was a planned attack over an extended period.

12/25/2012 8:30:18 AM

Quote :

"Citation needed. I know for a fact Columbine was a planned attack over an extended period."

Cool. That's one. We're off to a great start here.

Now the other ~10,000 that took place that year?

12/25/2012 11:37:03 AM

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/25/16125861-gunman-who-ambushed-firefighters-left-note-saying-he-wanted-to-kill-people?lite

I'm sure gun laws would have stopped this one...

12/25/2012 1:10:29 PM

Making murder and arson illegal seems to be pointless as well.

12/25/2012 1:33:03 PM

No one is saying that, but to react to this by talking about banning kerosene would be idiotic.

12/25/2012 2:33:42 PM

Quote :

"No one is saying that, but to react to this by talking about banning kerosene would be idiotic."

Yes, considering kerosene wasn't what killed anyone.

12/25/2012 2:35:36 PM

Quote :

"Even the columbine killers planned on using bombs as their main attack, the guns were supposed to be plan B if I recall correctly."

Exactly. They planned and built bombs for a year leading up to the attack. Less than half of them actually detonated and the ones that did didn't harm anyone or do any damage because they were poorly deployed. That's the point. Building and using bombs takes a rare individual. Using guns requires having arms and fingers.

[Edited on December 25, 2012 at 6:55 PM. Reason : :]

12/25/2012 6:54:37 PM

oh look, a liberal breaking a gun law on national TV.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/12/25/D-C-Police-Investigating-NBC-s-Gregory-For-Violations-of-Gun-Banning-Laws#disqus_thread

12/25/2012 7:32:42 PM