Politicians of all stripes don’t want real solutions to problems.
If problems are solved, people might begin to think politicians aren’t needed.
B.S. article.
The “good guy with a gun”......the security officer.....did NOT have a gun. The author of the article is ignorant.
He says women don’t like guns, when the facts show that more and more women are purchasing firearms.
I can’t find a reference now but it was reported that his mother took him shooting. I speculate that she may have purchased one or more guns for him. This makes for an interesting parallel to the Newtown shooter. Hyper-indulgent mother supplies guns and facilitates training to known disturbed son.
Stay safe. Stay armed.
So are they trying to say anything over ten makes you a psycho killer?
The fundamental question to answer with specifics IF all the weapons were traced back to a FFL is WHO filled out the Form 4473 for the purchase? Were any or all of them gifted to the son (there is a Form 4473 stipulation for this)?
This article doesn’t discuss that, and it is entirely possible that the mother was the one that purchased them. If so, she is open to liability if she allowed her son free access to them - especially if she had provable cause for concern over his behavioral state.
I ‘gifted’ some firearms to my daughter and my son-in-law. The first thing I required both of them to do was to obtain a weapons carry license and to take a basic handgun training course (classroom and range). Due diligence.
Simple fix: Ban no-gun zones.
Meanwhile, just do not go to places that ban guns.
One (1) security guard, armed or unarmed is not going to make a difference. especially if that guard is on one side of the campus and the shooter is on the other.
As I posed yeaterday;
1) Anyone who can qualify for a CCE permit should be allowed to carry on any public campus whether University, Community College, public school. This includes any teacher that can qualify.
2) Have a desk and computer terminal in every public school for cops to stop off and finish up end of shift and other paperwork. This means police car on scene at schools off and on every day and most important at odd times.
To me this is an easy cheap approach, not a fix but a start. However since we are dealing with bureaucrats and politicians here, cheap and easy will never even be discussed, only the very expensive and damn near impossible.
If the shooter’s guns were legal, libs would not see that as a proof that gun laws don’t work, but that the laws aren’t strong enough. So I’m not sure why conservatives keep bringing this up.
Other than a bad guy encountering more armed good guys, I can’t think of a GUN law that would stop the bad guys.
Do away with "gun free" (target rich) zones!
Not even the Security Guard was armed. What kind of shooting gallery do these parents send their kids to?
My “solution” might be helpful.
Require all law abiding citizens to own a gun. If they can’t afford one, I might support gun welfare.
Primary solution, encourage people to turn back to God and the Bible as a guide for life and living. Secondary solution, what this writer says - concealed carry everywhere and arming of teachers, etc. where needed.
Tertiary solution, find a way to be able to find individuals who are unstable either on the record or off the record (public reporting) and make sure that where they live they have no access, limited access or controlled access to weapons. The public reporting would be rife with problems with many reporting someone they simply don't like as being unstable instead of reporting someone who actually might be a danger. That process would have to be refined.
I think its patently obvious that high profile massacres have increased because of the coverage the perpetrator is guaranteed to get in the media: “Cable, Internet, political speeches etc.” These lunatics ultimately want attention and they feel powerless to get it any other way.
If Mika, and Morning Joe, and Stephanopolis really want mass shootings to stop, then they need to stop sensationalizing them for political advantage and ratings when they happen. In other words, run a scrawl on the bottom of the TV regarding what happened and leave it at that. That’s a solution that doesn’t need a Constitutional Amendment, involves very few people, and is in complete control of the people who say they are ‘so concerned about gun violence’. It won’t happen though.
Side note: Most mass murders are at that hands of 18-35 year old males. I truly think if these dudes would not do this sort of thing if they had better luck with the ladies. Seriously, a lonely dude who feels powerless to change his course and is a bit mentally unstable to begin with is a just a bad situation.
Women are more in control of their ‘personal life’ and rarely feel as powerless and hopeless as men regardless of their mental state. These nut jobs never have a girl friend and I don’t think it’s a coincidence because if they did, they wouldn’t feel so powerless. I don’t know what the answer is but, these are my thoughts.
Finally, I am trying to have a conversation. It doesn’t mean I’m right or that other ideas aren’t better...or worse. I’m just being conversational. Remember when we used to solve problems by talking like this? Either do I.
The left, the pervert alliance, Hollywood, and snarling liberals with their incessant attacks on white Christians, results in a mass murder by a Muslim affiliated half black and Barack Hussein Obama is shocked again and blames the weaponry. Time to remove all guns from politicians, judges, celebrities, the secret service, and their bodyguards to show us what a gun free zone is like.
In almost all of the mass shootings - and many shootings involving one or two victims - the killer was known by virtually everyone to have mental or emotional issues. So the object is to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill without using false allegations of mental illness as an excuse for taking guns away from virtually anyone.
So, obama should be arrested for inciting violence against Christians.
It's quite obvious, unless you're a godless Lefty.
From an e-mail I received recently:
Australian Gun Law Update;
Here’s a thought to warm some of your hearts....
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia
Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real
figures from Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own
government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria.....alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady
decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in ‘successfully ridding Australian society of guns....’
You won’t see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it’s too late!