Jump to content

Home

Shooting in Newtown, CT, 20 children and 6 Adults Dead


Scorge
 Share

Recommended Posts

give me a break...The 16 year old was killed, but in the attack that killed him was successfully after Ibrahim al-Banna. You know a member of Al Qaeda the people that attacked us on 9/11. Sad the kid was there, but had his dad not been a traitor to his country and stupid enough to put his son in harms way to use him as a human shield for Ibrahim al-Banna, the 16 year old may still be alive. The kid was not the target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm a massive monster. I play everything but StarCraft 2.

 

Although... I gotta say, had he stabbed the kids would people be blaming kitchen utensils? No. That would be stupid. I don't understand why people immediately blame guns and video games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope none of you here play Mass Effect 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Dynasty Warriors or
, you monsters.

 

Luckily I don't play any of those. There was a girl who was the little sister of one of the victims and she wrote a letter to President Obama, see for yourself.

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_c2#/video/bestoftv/2012/12/19/ac-ct-shooting-change-after-newtown.cnn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violent video games, Violent movies, access to firearms... all of these things get the blame. Whether any of them are worthy of the blame remains to be seen, McVey had none of those things and killed more people than Lanza. I would say that the Gun Free zones can soak up some of the blame too. Plenty to go around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the same unsubstantiated logic as those in Washington that want to blame video games, I am going to illogically state video games don’t kill, vidya saves lives. Crazy Bob who has the desire to shoot up the local Sizzler because they over cooked his t-bone, instead gets on his 360 and a shoot up geth instead. After his anger is satisfied he goes to the kitchen for a Twinkie for desert, returning angry and looking for someone to kill he fires up the 360 again.

 

I don’t really think violet video games, violent movies or even firearms are to blame. The person was mentally ill, the system is not designed to stop one person from a totally random act of violence and personally I would not want to live in a society that was designed to stop such as it would take away too many of the freedoms we take for granted every day. I happen to agree with the NRA in that people kill people, gun do not kill people. I also see firearms as a tool. That said, firearms and especially high capacity clips allow such random acts of violence to be more deadly and I see no reason high capacity clips should remain legal. If you can’t hit your target in 3 to 9 shots, 1. You are not protecting yourself, but are a danger to everyone around you. 2. Find another hobby. 3. Use a shotgun as self protection, but make sure I am behind you before you pull the trigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think limiting the magazines will be of much use. Exchanging out a magazine is very quick(Oh and DROP AND GIVE ME 20 FOR CALLING A MAGAZINE A CLIP!). 10 round magazines mean you know to fire 9, drop mag, fire 10, drop mag... Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of not wasting shots, and my primary defense pistol only has an 8 round mag, but if you really think about it, the 100 round mag that the shooter in Portland was actually his undoing, as he had either an FTF or FTE that caused a jam. Because he had such a large mag, he didn't carry more than the one. He HAD to take more time to clear the jam. Smaller mags you carry more of them. drop mag, rack, pop new mag in, rack, able to fire. The thing of it is though, every situation is different. If you were a store owner during a riot, you might want more than 10 rounds at a time.

 

At any rate, I couldn't agree with you more about the blame.

 

I say limit the civilians to whatever the President's security detail is allowed to carry. If it's good enough for all of us, it's good enough for him.

Edited by Tommycat
Stupid me got lost and sidetracked in thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah if you are trained, then the clip isn't much of a issue. Thing is most of the crazies using them are not trained. While stopping you as a vet or someone trained in law enforcement or security may be difficult while they reload, covering the ground to stop someone that is just crazy with no formal training will be made easier when they reload.

 

Just talking personally as someone with no formal training, but have been around firearms my entire life. Most likely you would be able to easily stop me reloading all the weapons I own, except a single shot shotgun. I am very proficient and loading and unloading it, as I have used it since I was 7 years old. I can fire, clear and reload it before the dove hits the ground.

 

Let me revise that statement, I can fire, clear and safely reload it before the dove hits the ground. My dad was very much fanatical about teaching gun safety. Which is a good thing...He was a US Marine, so my firearm training is 2nd hand Marine training.

Edited by mimartin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true. I do forget at times that while I can reload an AR almost as fast as I can shoot it, someone else may not be able to reload in the time it takes to rush them. But a .223 goes a long ways. Again, I point that the nutjob in Portland, had the 100 rd magazine. It jammed(a common failing with large capacity magazines), and he didn't have another magazine to swap.

 

The thing that worries me though. THIS

 

They are out there. And will continue to be out there even after the ban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of want to go back to the kids killed on subject. This line has been going through my head for a week now.

"It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. You take away all he's got and all he's ever going to have."

 

 

I have been hearing a lot about arming teachers, sorry I think this is stupid for the majority of teachers. I know some could do it, but others are going to hesitate. Many are teachers because they have a nurturing nature. This will most likely make the hesitate in the use of deadly force. In that situation, hesitation could cost them their life, but could also give the crazy another gun.

 

I don't think I could take a life unless it was to protect another life (that was not my own). Don't get me wrong, I have killed animals hunting, a horse and cows because they were suffering, but that is entire different from taking a human life. That said, in the case similar to this one where taking a life would save kids in my charge, I don't believe I would hesitate, but nobody knows for sure unless they are in that situation. I hope none of us are never in a situation to find out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how I feel about arming teachers...I certainly wouldn't mandate it. BUT I know a few teachers who are CCWL holders and former military. One of whom carries his weapon on school grounds even though it's a violation. You'd never know it, because the only time he would take it out is in a situation where lives depended on it. So, perhaps allow teachers to make the choice as to whether they carry, and they must obtain similar training to police officers and yearly quals to keep the "School Carry" license.

 

I agree with you about the difficulty of taking a life. Though, I'm pretty sure most people would lose their empathy for someone who just gunned down a 6 year old, still it takes a rigid mind to take out a firearm, aim at a person, and pull that trigger. God willing, I never have to fire. But if I draw down on someone, I will fire if it's clear. If you aren't willing to kill them, don't even bother pulling the firearm.

 

I would prefer to see police officers at schools, or even returning vets. My school had two police officers at all times. I mean come on. We can have a police officer at every dang Walmart to protect the "Made in China" stuff that they sell, but can't afford to send ONE or TWO to protect the CHILDREN? Something is fundamentally wrong. And having a police officer there means you can have a faster response than dialing 911. When you dial 911, it takes 3 minutes for the first cop to respond, and up to 20 minutes to arrive on scene. When an officer calls in shots fired, the average response is 7 minutes. Still a long time, but better than 20, and you do already have at least one on scene.

 

We have fire extinguishers, sprinklers, fireproof doors, emergency lighting, alarms, and a whole slew of protections from fire in every school I mean even the walls are built of a material that will not burn. And not ONE child has died of a fire in a school in over 50 years. What protections from criminals have we put in to schools?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how I feel about arming teachers...I certainly wouldn't mandate it. BUT I know a few teachers who are CCWL holders and former military. One of whom carries his weapon on school grounds even though it's a violation. You'd never know it, because the only time he would take it out is in a situation where lives depended on it. So, perhaps allow teachers to make the choice as to whether they carry, and they must obtain similar training to police officers and yearly quals to keep the "School Carry" license.

 

I have a bunch of friends that are teachers, most I would have no problem being around knowing they had a concealed handgun (which is saying something as I don't even like being around police officers that are armed and I am very strict about who I go hunting with). Many of them have permits, however the permit, at least in Texas, is worthless. It is even easier to get than a dog license. I have one too. Some of the teachers I know I will not even ride with them in a car because they are so hesitant entering a freeway that they scare me. I don't even want to think of them with a firearm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...