United States Gun Control: Gun Control = Fascism Everybody!

[emilyshortcake]

There is no reason for civilians/regular old joes to own an assault rifle. There just isn't.
Gun control laws should have changed ages ago, but unfortunately it took the loss of all these children for everyone to realize that.

 

[BigLutz]

For those talking about banning assault weapons after this shooting it is worth to note that the gun used by Adam in this shooting would NOT have been affected by either the 1994 law, Connecticut law, or by the bill introduced by Feinstein a few months ago.

http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/18/would-adam-lanzas-rifle-have-been-covere

Thing is, even if the assault weapons ban had remained in place, Adam's mother would still own the gun

 

[ebilly99]

For those talking about banning assault weapons after this shooting it is worth to note that the gun used by Adam in this shooting would NOT have been affected by either the 1994 law, Connecticut law, or by the bill introduced by Feinstein a few months ago.

http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/18/would-adam-lanzas-rifle-have-been-covere

Thing is, even if the assault weapons ban had remained in place, Adam's mother would still own the gun

Yeah sometimes it fails, but can you deny that if less assult rifles are on the streets there would be less murders.

 

[BigLutz]

Yeah sometimes it fails, but can you deny that if less assult rifles are on the streets there would be less murders.

Really? Do we have some sudden rush of murders by assault weapons being used? Mind you gun violence is down despite the fact the assault weapon ban was lifted, and despite the fact there are more guns out in the hands of people than ever before. And let's not forget the massive number of stabbings that is happening in Britain right now that has a full gun ban.

 

[ebilly99]

Really? Do we have some sudden rush of murders by assault weapons being used? Mind you gun violence is down despite the fact the assault weapon ban was lifted, and despite the fact there are more guns out in the hands of people than ever before. And let's not forget the massive number of stabbings that is happening in Britain right now that has a full gun ban.

From the info I got the murder rate with assault rifles has not changed much from 97

 

[BigLutz]

From the info I got the murder rate with assault rifles has not changed much from 97

Mind you there was a assault rifle ban in 1997, if the rate does not change then it seems that a ban will not change a thing does it?

 

[Thomas Elliot]

a family gun[/URL]Owning a gun makes even less sense for cases where mentally unstable people are in the same building as a gun. Teaching the mentally unstable how to shoot a gun is also not one of the wisest ideas I've ever heard. This article gives good insight into dealing with such children.

Part of the answer to "what do we do now" could be related to mental health and dealing with mental health issues. But I also fail to see the harm in strengthening gun ownership laws in general if it could mean less lives being lost.

Purely devil's advocate: How do you know that when he was taught how to shoot a gun, that he was diagnosed as having a mental health issue?

Also I disagree with your sentiment that mental health needs to be expanded. INSURANCE needs to be expanded, everyone in the country needs to have the ability to obtain and maintain insurance.
While I fortunately do not suffer from more debilitating mental health problem, I know my battles with ADHD have been a long, difficult and expensive road.
In order to be recognized as officially having ADHD you have to go to a psychologist who runs a battery of tests, which at the very least can run a few thousand dollars.
Then there are the doctor visits (which if you are lucky are only 4 times out of the year), then of course the medication. All of these which do not come cheap and even with insurance it can still be quite expensive. My meds with insurance cost me $60, which is for a 30 day supply and no refills. So every time I want a refill I have to set up an appointment to see my doctor.

And that is if you are lucky to ONLY suffer from ADHD(which many times that is not the only mental health problem).
My long drawn out point here is that YOU have to want to get help for these issues and even when you want to get help, you have to be able to afford the treatment.
You can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink, is my true point here. That you can have all the mental health initiatives but if you are a 20 year old male without insurance or doesn't believe he needs help you aren't going to take advantage of them.

 

[Pesky Persian]

I really don't understand why anyone would want to own a semiautomatic or automatic weapon in the first place. Anything other than what amounts to dick-waving contest purposes doesn't make sense. The idea of owning something with the express purpose of killing (usually people) actually kind of disgusts me. I'm totally for tighter gun laws and a ban on certain guns wouldn't bother me one bit. There is no reason to own most of these weapons. Hunting, I can understand. Personal protection*? I'm iffy about that. People don't get extensive training on how to use these weapons. It's easy to pay $60 and take the conceal carry class in most states (where it's legal) and get your permit. I bet half these people couldn't even hit the person attacking them so what's stopping them from hitting an innocent bystander?

And while I completely agree that we need better mental health care in the U.S., I don't see it as being a practical solution to the recent gun massacres. Why? The U.S. government (on both a state and federal level) doesn't care about mental health. All you have to do is spend some time in a mental health facility (not necessarily as a patient) to see how many frequent fliers there are because they can't get the long-term help they need. I honestly can't see the government spending the time and/or money on mental health to stop crime. If they did, our prisons probably wouldn't be as overrun as they are, drug addiction wouldn't be as rampant, etc. Not to mention, I don't think they'd bother to get a very good psychologist/psychiatrist to evaluate people. I mean, when have you known the U.S. to go with the top-notch people over the cheapest professional? Just look at how many mental disorders (hey there, schizophrenia) in which the person is incredibly charming and manipulative and you'll see just how easy it would be for some of those people to pass a psychological evaluation done by someone who doesn't have the proper experience/knowledge. I just don't see it as a long-term (or even short-term, actually) means of fixing this problem, not with the way the U.S. society works.

Furthermore, it's kind of interesting to me that people keep talking about how criminals will just keep getting illegal weapons anyway. I'm sure the gangbangers will still be out there buying their guns... But how many of these people are the ones shooting up schools and movie theaters? I may need to check back into things and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but in the cases of the past several shootings I've heard about, none of the killers had much of a criminal background (if any). So can we really say it's the criminals that cause these massacres? Serious question. I'm sure the gang members and big-time drug cartels are going to keep shooting... each other. I don't see any of them going into schools and killing dozens of small children. They'd gain nothing from that.

Edit: *Just wanted to add that I meant personal protection against other humans. I know there has been mention of protection against animals and as someone who lives in a rural area, I get that. However, I don't see why you couldn't just use a hunting rifle for that.

 

[SBaby]

Because he can totally do that. I mean, really, why would he? And what makes him think you will?

http://news.yahoo.com/congressional-backing-grows-gun-control-debate-220341844--politics.html

Now it's guns, mental health, and video games. This is how it starts.

I'm not saying I'm for banning guns or anything. I'm simply making an observation.

 

[The Admiral]

I think the fact that they want to drag video games into this proves that anyone who questions whether or not we can trust these people with legislation... might have a point. Didn't we have this argument ten years ago about media and end up in the area of "it doesn't hold that much sway"? In all, this sounds like more attempts to bully the "freak" cultures. cf. all the stories about boys/men in the 60s/70s being discriminated against for having long hair, the finger-pointing at Doom and Marilyn Manson following Columbine, etc.

 

[WizardTrubbish]

http://news.yahoo.com/congressional-backing-grows-gun-control-debate-220341844--politics.html

Now it's guns, mental health, and video games. This is how it starts.

I'm not saying I'm for banning guns or anything. I'm simply making an observation.

And nowhere in that article did it say Obama had any intentions of banning guns. You know increasing gun control =/= banning guns

 

[Thomas Elliot]

I do agree that video games/music/movies are not the root cause of these children engaging in these violent acts, yet I do believe there is something to be said for the level of violence being romanticized in these mediums, and allowing children and young adults to be further desensitized to violence.
Do most of us know that its just words in a song, pictures on a screen or pixels in a digital world? Yes.
But just because you are an expert at Call of Duty, doesn't mean you are fully prepared to be shipped out to a war torn country and fully comprehend that kind of violence being played out in that kind of theater.

 

[BJPalmer85]

I think the fact that they want to drag video games into this proves that anyone who questions whether or not we can trust these people with legislation... might have a point. Didn't we have this argument ten years ago about media and end up in the area of "it doesn't hold that much sway"? In all, this sounds like more attempts to bully the "freak" cultures. cf. all the stories about boys/men in the 60s/70s being discriminated against for having long hair, the finger-pointing at Doom and Marilyn Manson following Columbine, etc.

I was waiting for this to get dropped in and I agree. They have a legitimate problem and instead of trying to find the right solution they attack something that has nothing to do with the problem....

I am guessing it is safe to assume that most (if not all) of the people on the forum play video games other than Pokemon. If any of you play AC, COD, Halo or any other violent game, are you inclined to do what you see in the games?

I have been listening to Marilyn Manson for years, and while his lyrics are a little off at times, he and his band make great music. Same goes for Eminem, I am sure that everyone knows his story, his lyrics can be messed up and completely out there at times but he is still a great musician.

Same goes for movies, none of us here are reenacting what is portrayed in the movies we have seen, admittedly I did try my hand at morphing after watching Mighty Morphin Power Rangers.

The mediums are not the problem, if they were there would be way more incidents than we have now that are linked to movie, music and VGs.

It is people in power or with a voice that dont like these particular items that want to blame them for problems instead trying to find a real solution or even parents that are unwilling to admit that their kid has a problem and that it must be related to video games or music...blah blah blah

I do agree that video games/music/movies are not the root cause of these children engaging in these violent acts, yet I do believe there is something to be said for the level of violence being romanticized in these mediums, and allowing children and young adults to be further desensitized to violence.
Do most of us know that its just words in a song, pictures on a screen or pixels in a digital world? Yes.
But just because you are an expert at Call of Duty, doesn't mean you are fully prepared to be shipped out to a war torn country and fully comprehend that kind of violence being played out in that kind of theater.

I honestly do not think that people are being all that desensitized. Ive watched/played these types of things for years and I have never been desensitized to them. Shooting someone in a video game or seeing some one shot in a movie is WAY different that seeing it in person. I can't tell you how much the two don't even compare.

Maybe I am unique, but I do not think so.

B

EDIT: This article is interesting in that it claims that Lanza (CT shooter) planned his attack before hand and didn't "snap" like people are suggesting. The most interesting part is that a former psych profiler for the FBI says that people need to quit focusing on the mental health issues. Thoughts?

 

[Raymond - king of ducks]

There is no reason for civilians/regular old joes to own an assault rifle. There just isn't.
Gun control laws should have changed ages ago, but unfortunately it took the loss of all these children for everyone to realize that.

Semi-automatic rifle =/= assault rifle.

 

[SBaby]

And nowhere in that article did it say Obama had any intentions of banning guns. You know increasing gun control =/= banning guns

Again, I said I was simply making an observation based on the article. Read what I posted. And this article doesn't specifically say he's banning guns. But I'm telling you right now. This is how it starts. The fact that NRA guys are on board with this should be a pretty clear indication that peoples' stances on the issue are shifting.

Anyway, I brought that article up because of the fact that they're bringing video games into the issue now, not because I thought it meant a ban on guns. You should know this if you read what I posted.

 

[Steampunk]

Well, firstly having guns and children in the same building really isn't the best idea. After all, a three-year-old boy just shot himself with a family gun just this Monday, and that wasn't the only incident. Owning a gun makes even less sense for cases where mentally unstable people are in the same building as a gun. Teaching the mentally unstable how to shoot a gun is also not one of the wisest ideas I've ever heard. This article gives good insight into dealing with such children.

Part of the answer to "what do we do now" could be related to mental health and dealing with mental health issues. But I also fail to see the harm in strengthening gun ownership laws in general if it could mean less lives being lost.

I also don't come from a culture where guns have such a high status, so that prevents me from understanding why guns are so highly valued for others. I honestly just don't get it, and it confounds me that people are fine with risking so much for the right to own weapons capable of an unnecessary degree of destruction.

~Psychic

I agree with this 100%
And like one person said, most people dont realise the amout of destruction on of those weapons can cause.
One more thing (trying to spark interest in the violence and video games thread) Do you think that that killer played games like Halo or call of duty? If so did it effect fis rampage?

EDIT: totally just realised that that thread was gone XD

 

[WizardTrubbish]

Again, I said I was simply making an observation based on the article. Read what I posted. And this article doesn't specifically say he's banning guns. But I'm telling you right now. This is how it starts. The fact that NRA guys are on board with this should be a pretty clear indication that peoples' stances on the issue are shifting.

Yes, more people are on board with gun control, but really, a gun ban is unlikely, impractical, and unconstitutional.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3
Any way, it looks like we're going to see some gun control legislation by January. Obama put Biden in charge of finding a plan to prevent gun violence.

 

[BigLutz]

Thought it would be worth pointing out Israel allowed teachers to start carrying guns after an islamic attack on their schools. As such the attacks have become rare to non existent as the schools were no longer soft targets

http://www.aim.org/guest-column/follow-israels-gun-control-example//

 

[Tyrant Tar]

^ Allowed the teachers to carry weapons AND got armed security guards, it seems. It's not really clear from the article which, or if both, is what is really helping there.

I don't suppose we know how often Israeli and US schools are threatened? I'd imagine Israeli schools would be in a more constant state of danger compared to the US, in which case their safety measures may not be appropriate for us, but I'm just speculated there.

 

[BigLutz]

^ Allowed the teachers to carry weapons AND got armed security guards, it seems. It's not really clear from the article which, or if both, is what is really helping there.

I don't suppose we know how often Israeli and US schools are threatened? I'd imagine Israeli schools would be in a more constant state of danger compared to the US, in which case their safety measures may not be appropriate for us, but I'm just speculated there.

Well if it can stop a wide range of psychotic attacks on Israeli schools, then you would think it would deter a much smaller number on American schools.