School shooting at SC Elementary School
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-10-2016, 09:44 AM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 09:30 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  N.V.M.
Huh

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 09:47 AM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 09:44 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 09:30 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  N.V.M.
Huh
"NeVer Mind", a way to retract a post. Can't post empty.

Urban Dictionary is our friend.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 09:53 AM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 09:47 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 09:44 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Huh
"NeVer Mind", a way to retract a post. Can't post empty.

Urban Dictionary is our friend.

Ah, another new one to me.

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 09:56 AM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2016 10:01 AM by Chas.)
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 09:00 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 06:00 AM)Chas Wrote:  A child should not have unsupervised access to a firearm.
But you do seem to be conflating ownership and access. It is not legal for children to purchase or own firearms.


Those regulations exist where I reside (Massachusetts) and in other states, as well.
Unfortunately, they are not universal.

I am putting together irresponsible ownership, or at least poor security, of firearms by parents or other adults who have legal ownership and the obvious fact that this disturbed child gained access to a firearm.

Think we have been round this loop before, Chas, as others have hinted it seems that you tend to not see what do not want to see.

I see that people can mistakes or be irresponsible; I have never said any differently.
However, you seem to read in to what I post what you want to see.

I support laws that increase safety, such as licensing, safety training, safe storage and so on. I have said so here repeatedly.

Quote:here we go again, the mere fact that there are x million guns owned by x million adults who possibly cover every inch of the ''normal'' spectrum means there will be x thousand, at least, irresponsible owners. They might well start of on the right track but after, oh, three years of locking the gun in this draw, locking the ammo in that drawe ans then unlocking it all and putting it in the pocket or handbag or holster in the morning. The good habits slip faster than the bad ones every time. Aw, just leave it all in the bureau draw, in the handbag, in the pocket...

Good to hear that some states have tight regulation before a permit to purchase is issued. Perhaps annual tests in future?

Annual tests of what?

Quote:This child apparently killed his farther.
Did he
a. acquire the gun because it was easily accessible, then kill his father with it before he killed the others?
b. stab his father, take the keys, access the firearm and then proceed to use it at the school?

I have not reread the information given so far I have to admit. But the a. situation indicates a poor level of responsibility aqnd the b. situation may indicate a better level.

If 1 in 1000 of the possible 51 million households with a gun has lax security and safety then that makes 51000 danger spots. if 1 in 1000 of those have a disturbed, drunk, macho, dumb or whatever kid then that is a mere 51 potential incidents. I agree that is not a lot, but I am trying to be conservative.

Still too many.

But then, how many disturbed etc adults have access to firearms? Again wether legally or due to lax security does not matter, it is the potential for committing murder, for loss of life, that matters.

Actually, it does matter. One is addressed by laws and regulations, the other by education.

Quote:I am going to guess that, overall, it is very high. Somewhere in the hundreds over any ten year period?

99 safe owners are let down by one unsafe owner. It is the safe owners that should be fighting for maximum regulation nationwide to protect their own interests.

Many of us do. What we object to are laws and regulations that don't actually do anything except restrict safe, legal owners.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 11:33 AM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
Chss, I think we are at cross purposes after the same target - each of us looking st it ftom a different viewpoint.

One of the big differences, that must affect our way of seeing things, between the UK and the U S is that you have local stare laws whereas we are, in effect a federation with national laws.

I find it not unusual to have very, very strict national legislation as to who can own what kind of firearm and for what purposes. Every person has to have a good readon for owbership, including sporting firearns and will undergo tight checks. Any firearm, including sporting ones, would have to be carried in a lockable case, hard or soft, in public places and be empty of ammunition.

But, in comparison, there is only a tiny fraction of the weapons in America and the most common will probably be shotguns. Competition rifles, mostly small calibre, next. You have to have a very, very good reason to get a handgun licence for other than competition ones, and then have club membership for all competition guns.

No chance for tight laws such as we have over there I think, any heavy federal come down might end in a new civil war or events like Texit!

When every state matches the one with the safest regulations things might be safer for all - providing it eliminates illegal purchase or acquisition, irresponsible ownership and access by disturbed or untrained people as far as is humanly possible.

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 02:09 PM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2016 07:07 PM by yakherder.)
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 11:33 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  When every state matches the one with the safest regulations things might be safer for all - providing it eliminates illegal purchase or acquisition, irresponsible ownership and access by disturbed or untrained people as far as is humanly possible.

Safest by which standard? When I Google "safest state" Vermont predictably pops up for almost every result.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
03-10-2016, 02:47 PM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 02:09 PM)yakherder Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 11:33 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  When every state matches the one with the safest regulations things might be safer for all - providing it eliminates illegal purchase or acquisition, irresponsible ownership and access by disturbed or untrained people as far as is humanly possible.

Safest but which standard? When I Google "safest state" Vermont predictably pops up for almost every result.

It's because they're happy...

They can carry a gun concealed without a permit, and there's plenty of maple syrup to go around......

What else could you want??

Tongue

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
03-10-2016, 02:59 PM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 02:09 PM)yakherder Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 11:33 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  When every state matches the one with the safest regulations things might be safer for all - providing it eliminates illegal purchase or acquisition, irresponsible ownership and access by disturbed or untrained people as far as is humanly possible.

Safest but which standard? When I Google "safest state" Vermont predictably pops up for almost every result.

Yes, a careful analys would be needed. The demographics of the states are, I would guess, as varied as there are states in number! No point in picking the state with the least killings if it happened to be the state with the least people or guns. The vuew point and value set of thevststes are probably all unique. Someonebp once said that America was a loose association of 50 countries which, grudgingly, agree to certain things in common.

But there should be an objective way of assessing these things. There are surely commonly accepted rules to form a basis. Open carrying only becomes a problem if there is a danger the carrier could actually be attacked and his gun stolen. A sudden rear attack with an iron bar is hard to beat even with a gun.

Anyway, though gun crime is on the increase I am glad I live in the UK and feel for all those who have lost loved ones partly due to what amounts to an archaic mindset. The West is still rather Wild it seems. That's West of Europe.

Though Europe does have its wilder spots.

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 05:20 PM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 02:59 PM)Gloucester Wrote:  
(03-10-2016 02:09 PM)yakherder Wrote:  Safest but which standard? When I Google "safest state" Vermont predictably pops up for almost every result.

Yes, a careful analys would be needed. The demographics of the states are, I would guess, as varied as there are states in number! No point in picking the state with the least killings if it happened to be the state with the least people or guns. The vuew point and value set of thevststes are probably all unique. Someonebp once said that America was a loose association of 50 countries which, grudgingly, agree to certain things in common.

But there should be an objective way of assessing these things. There are surely commonly accepted rules to form a basis. Open carrying only becomes a problem if there is a danger the carrier could actually be attacked and his gun stolen. A sudden rear attack with an iron bar is hard to beat even with a gun.

Anyway, though gun crime is on the increase I am glad I live in the UK and feel for all those who have lost loved ones partly due to what amounts to an archaic mindset. The West is still rather Wild it seems. That's West of Europe.

Though Europe does have its wilder spots.

Vermont's Constitution guarantees its people the right to firearms. There are lots of guns in Vermont.

So, yes, there is a need to look at the demographics, the kind of society, as to why it is violent or not. It's not the guns, per se.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2016, 05:30 PM
RE: School shooting at SC Elementary School
(03-10-2016 11:33 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Chss, I think we are at cross purposes after the same target - each of us looking st it ftom a different viewpoint.

It's not cross-purposes - it's a different background giving rise to different expectations.

Quote:One of the big differences, that must affect our way of seeing things, between the UK and the U S is that you have local stare laws whereas we are, in effect a federation with national laws.

There are many federal firearms laws in the U.S.

Quote:I find it not unusual to have very, very strict national legislation as to who can own what kind of firearm and for what purposes. Every person has to have a good readon for owbership, including sporting firearns and will undergo tight checks. Any firearm, including sporting ones, would have to be carried in a lockable case, hard or soft, in public places and be empty of ammunition.

Some states are strict, others not so much.
Federal law requires firearms be secured (locked or in a locked container) and separate from ammunition while transporting them across state lines.
It also guarantees the legality of doing so regardless of the laws of the state or states being transited.

Quote:But, in comparison, there is only a tiny fraction of the weapons in America and the most common will probably be shotguns. Competition rifles, mostly small calibre, next. You have to have a very, very good reason to get a handgun licence for other than competition ones, and then have club membership for all competition guns.

I am somewhat familiar with that. In fact, just last week I was teaching a young Englishman how to shoot trap. He was envious of being able to have one's own shotguns.

Quote:No chance for tight laws such as we have over there I think, any heavy federal come down might end in a new civil war or events like Texit!

For 10 years there was a federal "assault weapons ban". It was quite strict and pissed off a lot of people.
It was not renewed because it was shown to have had no effect on gun violence.

Quote:When every state matches the one with the safest regulations things might be safer for all - providing it eliminates illegal purchase or acquisition, irresponsible ownership and access by disturbed or untrained people as far as is humanly possible.

Illegal purchase or acquisition will never be eliminated.

To improve the prevention of unbalanced people getting or keeping firearms, mental health care and diagnosis will have to be overhauled and HIPAA heavily modified.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: