NRA Newtown response [W:818]

Re: NRA Newtown response

Problem is these are the same computer games/movies countries like Japan, Germany, UK etc watch and you dont see much gun crime there. As for the whole armed guard in schools my question is where does it stop? If a gunman kills the guard and then shoots a load of kids what will be your response then? More guards? Barbed wire? Maybe a moat......

Re: NRA Newtown response

TurtleDude said:

no need to judge her-she made a mistake apparently and paid the price. banning her from having guns retroactively apparently is what the anti gun nuts are arguing

not me

Click to expand...

Maybe you would have a point if it was ONLY that poor mother who "paid the price" of her carelessness. Unfortunatley that is not the case. I would support manslaughter charges for all parents whose children use their guns to kill themselves or others though. Maybe the threat of jail time would stop some of this.
I can forgive her, it's the greedy smuck that sold that Bushmaster to her that I despise. They are not selling washing machines and marketing them like they are is unforgiveable. There is no need for her having a weapon that deadly and she should have been told so.

Re: NRA Newtown response

Higgins86 said:

Problem is these are the same computer games/movies countries like Japan, Germany, UK etc watch and you dont see much gun crime there. As for the whole armed guard in schools my question is where does it stop? If a gunman kills the guard and then shoots a load of kids what will be your response then? More guards? Barbed wire? Maybe a moat......

Click to expand...

An armed guard could act as a deterrant. Let's not forget these shootings take place in gun free zones. If would be shooters knew they would draw fire during his attack, he might have second thoughts. Let's face it, the "gun free zone" signs aren't doing any good.

Re: NRA Newtown response

Eighty Deuce said:

Actually, I spent 7 years in the Military, where we are trained to confront the bad guys, as that is expected. So we use guns to do that. Follow me so far ?

Now, your argument seems to be that I will no longer ever confront bad guys again, so why be armed ? Heck, you haven't been so confronted in 40 years in NYC, so why worry, eh ?

Are you going to now tell me, and others, that there have been no good folks killed by the guns of bad folks in NYC in your 40 years ? You wanna bet that the murder-by-gun rate in NYC is worse than in my Florida County ? Even though you have not been shot at, or in a situation where a handgun was used to take from you ?

Sucks to be you. In more ways than you know.

Click to expand...

When I read someone personally attacking someone else while debating it shows me that the person attacking is losing the debate because one has to use insults rather than logic to debate. Saying "it sucks to be you" is insulting, pointless, petty, inaccurate and shows your debating skills.

The state of Florida has a higher per capita murder rate than the state of NY. NY has much stricter gun control laws than Florida. My mother lives in Florida in Palm Beach and the murder rate there is higher than it is in NYC, palm trees notwithstanding.

No one is saying you can't own guns - what people are saying is that AR 15 type guns have no place in a private citizen's arsenal nor do the high round clips they use. That's it. You can play with guns as much as your heart desires.

When was the last time you used a gun to protect yourself? Why? (Do not include military examples).

People do get killed in NYC by guns still - but at a much lower rate per capita than many other US cities. Why is that? For the most part NYC is a "gun free zone" and owning a gun is strictly regulated.

Murder Rates Nationally and By State | Death Penalty Information Center

Re: NRA Newtown response

grip said:

It's been my experience that people who love guns actually respect them the most and preach safety. It's the people who get either unhealthily obsessed, act callously or use poor judgment that create most the problems. Some preppers who allow access to their arsenal by family members and friends that aren't mentally/emotionally capable of using common sense aren't practicing mature or responsible behavior. Mistakes of this caliber can cost lives and serious injury but it's part of life and growing.

Click to expand...

Personally speaking, I respect guns. I only use them for protection, and I am not the type to obsessively worry the government is going to take them away nor do I rush out and stock up on ammo after every mass shooting. One gun is enough for me.

I just don't relate to some people on this issue

Re: NRA Newtown response

nota bene said:

Sit in judgment when you have fully lived these particular particulars and have been a mother. Yeah, I've read the "prepper" angle too, but I've also read other info about the context of the target-practice-as-bonding-stuff. We're talking about a unique situation here. Too easy to categorize the mother and son and the psych dynamics into a convenient category when no size fits all.

Click to expand...

Why is it wrong to expect her to keep the guns locked up and out of his ability to just fetch at his convenience?

It's not all his mother's fault, as it was difficult for her to get the help he needed or find the proper resources. I am sure she was a good mother, but she didn't realize how dangerous he was or what he was capable with doing with her own guns.

Absolutely, the guy should not have been taught to handle guns...

Re: NRA Newtown response

nota bene said:

Yeah, I've read a few "prepper" pieces too. Don't reduce this to a prepper thing. Don't dismiss this as a gun-enthusiasts-are-the-problem-thing. This is a unique situation about which none of us is fully aware.

Click to expand...

I said sometimes gun enthusiasts are the problem. You don't see anything wrong with a mother putting automatic rifles in her baby's crib and taking pictures? She also had her toddler aiming at gun at her husband, with a towel on his like as if he were a terrorist. She thought the pictures were funny and cute. I find them disturbing and teaching her kids that guns are toys.

Some gun enthusiasts are a problem, and I am fully sticking by my statement.

Re: NRA Newtown response

cpwill said:

Expected to? Meh, it's certainly possible. Even if they don't succeed in killing the shooter, they would certainly delay/distract them and thus save lives. Taking a round to body-armor isn't like the movies where you just grunt and move on - it still knocks you like getting punched by a sledgehammer.

However, a trained individual responding to an active shooter, such as what the NRA (and we, here) suggests? Definitely.

Click to expand...

I don't think it would be easy... as far as other shootings are concerned, there has been trained people and ex cops trying to take down people with little to no armor and failing to get a lethal shot.

Re: NRA Newtown response

cpwill said:

wtf? Aurora had no-carry laws, I'm pretty sure if you were to ask the NRA if someone in the audience should have been allowed to shoot back they would answer you in the affirmative.

This is reaching just to try to ascribe moral illegitimacy to those with whom you disagree.

Click to expand...

Why hasn't the NRA responded to any other mass shooting tragedy? That's what I want to know. I think it's a valid question, and obviously one you yourself cannot answer.

Re: NRA Newtown response

SheWolf said:

Why is it wrong to expect her to keep the guns locked up and out of his ability to just fetch at his convenience?

It's not all his mother's fault, as it was difficult for her to get the help he needed or find the proper resources. I am sure she was a good mother, but she didn't realize how dangerous he was or what he was capable with doing with her own guns.

Absolutely, the guy should not have been taught to handle guns...

Click to expand...

How do you know where Nancy Lanza kept her guns? How could she have known that her son was going to snap as he did?

Re: NRA Newtown response

jakiejakester said:

When I read someone personally attacking someone else while debating it shows me that the person attacking is losing the debate because one has to use insults rather than logic to debate. Saying "it sucks to be you" is insulting, pointless, petty, inaccurate and shows your debating skills.

The state of Florida has a higher per capita murder rate than the state of NY. NY has much stricter gun control laws than Florida. My mother lives in Florida in Palm Beach and the murder rate there is higher than it is in NYC, palm trees notwithstanding.

No one is saying you can't own guns - what people are saying is that AR 15 type guns have no place in a private citizen's arsenal nor do the high round clips they use. That's it. You can play with guns as much as your heart desires.

When was the last time you used a gun to protect yourself? Why? (Do not include military examples).

People do get killed in NYC by guns still - but at a much lower rate per capita than many other US cities. Why is that? For the most part NYC is a "gun free zone" and owning a gun is strictly regulated.

Murder Rates Nationally and By State | Death Penalty Information Center

Click to expand...

You can report somebody for personally attacking you. Just click the little triangle thingy on the bottom, left hand side of his post.

Re: NRA Newtown response

nota bene said:

How do you know where Nancy Lanza kept her guns? How could she have known that her son was going to snap as he did?

Click to expand...

She didn't keep her guns locked and kept away from him, and that is the point. If she owns a gun, so should be responsible for securing it. To me that is common sense.

As for the rest of your post, it doesn't matter if she was psychic or not or knew he was going to be a mass shooter or not. She should have kept her guns out of his reach. I cannot comprehend how somebody can determine their own child needs to be committed because they cannot take care of themselves and are anti social, could also believe that teaching him to use firearms is a good idea. I think she make a number of bad decisions.

I am not attacking the weapons themselves, just arguing the mother could have done more to prevent his access to weapons. Why do you feel otherwise? Why do you think it was fine he had access to her weapons?

Re: NRA Newtown response

jakiejakester said:

You, on the other hand and all other civilians DO NOT NEED AR 15 type weapons to protect us.

Click to expand...

And Homosexuals DO NOT NEED to legally be able to have homo butt sex, as it does not procreate.....(don't take this the wrong way, I care less about gay people having gay sex, its an example of this "need" theory)
You are missing the point. Nobody said anything about NEEDING (at least I haven't) an AR15. You are banning a product which many people enjoy, which also happens to be protected by a constitutional amendment for no clear reason or purpose except that it happened to be used in some shootings, and won't prevent furthur shootings. (We all remember Virginia Tech? Done with pistols)
The point is that banning something because it is not needed is not good enough.

You might be very capable and well trained but you're not a professional who earns his living protecting people. You can use all the other fun guns you have in your personal stash to protect yourself. I don't see how you having a weapon that has magazines or drums that hold 100 or more rounds will come into play at any point in your life to "protect" yourself in a way that your other guns won't.

Click to expand...

Why do people keep focusing on the 100rd fail magazine that jams and real gun knowledgeable people don't even use them?? Those 100rd drums are not the standard, they are a rarely used toy, the fact that the colorado shooter was using it probably saved lives. Ban the stupid 100rd magazine, I give a **** less really as long as that is as far as it goes.

That's my, to use your personal insult "moronic" point. No civilian has a need for those sort of weapons to protect themselves. If that is what you need to protect yourself you must live in a part of America that I didn't know existed...an alternate universe or is it simply a make believe bubble?

Click to expand...

Nobody needs to have butt sex to procreate either.....

Re: NRA Newtown response

TaraAnne said:

In this case a handgun would have done nothing he was armed to the teeth and body armor. Sorry those that think a hand gun would have helped are flat wrong. I do see your point but in this case it a no go!

Click to expand...

A. No body armor. thats a fallacy.

B. It doesn't matter how many guns one has, their guns won't protect them from a well placed shot that they were not expecting.

Re: NRA Newtown response

SheWolf said:

The NRA sounds like they condemn designated gun free zones. Should we all be allowed to pack heat in airports and now, and hire armed guards there as well.... libraries, congress, state capitals, government offices, etc.?

Is more guns and armed guards a universal solution?

Click to expand...

No, but if you are going to disarm someone via a "gun free zone" then you need to have trained and reliable armed security personnel present.

Re: NRA Newtown response

SheWolf said:

She didn't keep her guns locked and kept away from him, and that is the point. If she owns a gun, so should be responsible for securing it. To me that is common sense.

As for the rest of your post, it doesn't matter if she was psychic or not or knew he was going to be a mass shooter or not. She should have kept her guns out of his reach. I cannot comprehend how somebody can determine their own child needs to be committed because they cannot take care of themselves and are anti social, could also believe that teaching him to use firearms is a good idea. I think she make a number of bad decisions.

I am not attacking the weapons themselves, just arguing the mother could have done more to prevent his access to weapons. Why do you feel otherwise? Why do you think it was fine he had access to her weapons?

Click to expand...

Because until Adam Lanza snapped, there was nothing to suggest that he would do what he did. Shooter's mother wanted her son to fit in, friend says - CNN.com

Re: NRA Newtown response

And he wasn't a child; he was 20 years old.

Re: NRA Newtown response

SheWolf said:

Personally speaking, I respect guns. I only use them for protection, and I am not the type to obsessively worry the government is going to take them away nor do I rush out and stock up on ammo after every mass shooting. One gun is enough for me.

I just don't relate to some people on this issue

Click to expand...

A healthy dose of fear for the ease in which a gun can damage or take life is the right kind of respect.

I'm not worried about the gov over regulating guns because with over 300 million in circulation they'll never stop the ownership of them.
And 99% of the population will realistically never discharge one in self defense in their lifetime. I remember when it was rare for a police officer to ever shoot anyone. I've seen News stories where there's an occasional incidence of a store owner saving their lives with a firearm against a perp or a home owner defending against an intruder.

I'd own one pistola for any possible but highly unlikely rioting after a natural disaster or other bizarre occurrence, where I need serious firepower but otherwise I'll just pepper/mace and kneecap an aggressor. If they have a gun and mine isn't at hand or available I'm running like Carl Lewis racing the wind.

Otherwise I don't relate to most people at all on this issue. If I had a gun collection, which are actually good investments right now and went to the range with other enthusiasts for recreational activity, then I could see the passion in defense of gun owner rights. Video games supply me with my dose of shoot'em up bang bang. And honestly I don't think most preppers really believe in a zombie apocalypse. It's a fantasy or game they use as an excuse to play soldier, which is reasonably harmless if their minds are stable.

Re: NRA Newtown response

nota bene said:

Because until Adam Lanza snapped, there was nothing to suggest that he would do what he did. Shooter's mother wanted her son to fit in, friend says - CNN.com

Click to expand...

So you don't think his mother should have kept his guns locked and away from Lanza... I think you're not promoting responsibility. I sure when he aimed her own gun at her face, she realized she should have done more to keep him from easily accessing her guns.

And as far as the snapping argument goes, I don't think that that is supported or corroborated by anything. We don't know what kind of warning signs he displayed or not, nor for how long. We don't even know exactly why his mother wanted him committed, what kind of behavior he was displaying, or what her personal concerns were.. was she afraid of him? Why did she say he was getting harder and harder to reach? That is all up in air, and those answers are being investigated. But you continue that his mother was completely reasonable and responsible by not doing more to keep her firearms away from a person with an anti social personality disorder.

You support irresponsible gun ownership, and I don't. That is when gun enthusiasts become part of the problem. Stop arguing in support of personal irresponsibility by gun owners.

Re: NRA Newtown response

nota bene said:

And he wasn't a child; he was 20 years old.

Click to expand...

He was his mother's child, and she made all the decisions for him... and cared for as if he were a minor because he wasn't capable of making his own decisions.

He will always be the child of his mother, but he was not an minor.

I know what you are saying, but the relationship was a mother-son one. I acknowledge he was not a minor though

Re: NRA Newtown response

grip said:

A healthy dose of fear for the ease in which a gun can damage or take life is the right kind of respect.

I'm not worried about the gov over regulating guns because with over 300 million in circulation they'll never stop the ownership of them.
And 99% of the population will realistically never discharge one in self defense in their lifetime. I remember when it was rare for a police officer to ever shoot anyone. I've seen News stories where there's an occasional incidence of a store owner saving their lives with a firearm against a perp or a home owner defending against an intruder.

I'd own one pistola for any possible but highly unlikely rioting after a natural disaster or other bizarre occurrence, where I need serious firepower but otherwise I'll just pepper/mace and kneecap an aggressor. If they have a gun and mine isn't at hand or available I'm running like Carl Lewis racing the wind.

Otherwise I don't relate to most people at all on this issue. If I had a gun collection, which are actually good investments right now and went to the range with other enthusiasts for recreational activity, then I could see the passion in defense of gun owner rights. Video games supply me with my dose of shoot'em up bang bang. And honestly I don't think most preppers really believe in a zombie apocalypse. It's a fantasy or game they use as an excuse to play soldier, which is reasonably harmless if their minds are stable.

Click to expand...

Sounds like we see eye to eye. My dad was a member of the NRA, and he still owns a few firearms but he quit on the NRA. They kept calling him and talking about people trying to take his guns away and to give them money to defend his rights. My Dad finally got tired of it and constant hounding for contributions, plue he didn't buy into the fear mongering that his guns would be take away tomorrow. He hasn't supported or been a member of NRA for probably 10 years now, but he remains a gun owner.

The NRA is a lobby group, and after seeing their reaction to this shooting, I support them even less.

Re: NRA Newtown response

Caine said:

A. No body armor. thats a fallacy.

B. It doesn't matter how many guns one has, their guns won't protect them from a well placed shot that they were not expecting.

Click to expand...

Okay I havent read that yet but stand corrected if it is true. However you would still be at a three to one disadvatnge with out the ability to spray. You might get some change with supression fire but then you will have to rince and repeat/ More guns would not have helped.

Re: NRA Newtown response

SheWolf said:

Sounds like we see eye to eye. My dad was a member of the NRA, and he still owns a few firearms but he quit on the NRA. They kept calling him and talking about people trying to take his guns away and to give them money to defend his rights. My Dad finally got tired of it and constant hounding for contributions, plue he didn't buy into the fear mongering that his guns would be take away tomorrow. He hasn't supported or been a member of NRA for probably 10 years now, but he remains a gun owner.

The NRA is a lobby group, and after seeing their reaction to this shooting, I support them even less.

Click to expand...

Yeah, unfortunately each side of this issue ramps up the rhetoric with every incident, using it as a political ball to bat around with no sensible suggestions. The Veterans Association has become a lobby that harangues for donations after you give once also. I think people need to use their heads and not their hearts so much for reasonable actions and attitudes. And the Media needs to quit sensationalizing every serious event for sheer ratings. They try to shape and change public policy in a frenzy, which is the worst way and time to address anything.

Re: NRA Newtown response

grip said:

Yeah, unfortunately each side of this issue ramps up the rhetoric with every incident, using it as a political ball to bat around with no sensible suggestions. The Veterans Association has become a lobby that harangues for donations after you give once also. I think people need to use their heads and not their hearts so much for reasonable actions and attitudes. And the Media needs to quit sensationalizing every serious event for sheer ratings. They try to shape and change public policy in a frenzy, which is the worst way and time to address anything.

Click to expand...

I hope people start seeing the NRA for what it is soon.

Re: NRA Newtown response

SheWolf said:

So you don't think his mother should have kept his guns locked and away from Lanza... I think you're not promoting responsibility. I sure when he aimed her own gun at her face, she realized she should have done more to keep him from easily accessing her guns.

And as far as the snapping argument goes, I don't think that that is supported or corroborated by anything. We don't know what kind of warning signs he displayed or not, nor for how long. We don't even know exactly why his mother wanted him committed, what kind of behavior he was displaying, or what her personal concerns were.. was she afraid of him? Why did she say he was getting harder and harder to reach? That is all up in air, and those answers are being investigated. But you continue that his mother was completely reasonable and responsible by not doing more to keep her firearms away from a person with an anti social personality disorder.

You support irresponsible gun ownership, and I don't. That is when gun enthusiasts become part of the problem. Stop arguing in support of personal irresponsibility by gun owners.

Click to expand...

I am not arguing for personal irresponsibility. I can see that you didn't read the CNN article to which I linked you. In it, those who knew her said that she was very responsible.

There is no indication that Nancy Lanza was irresponsible. There is also no evidence that she was even awake when shot; in fact, every report I've read suggests that she was likely asleep when murdered.

You're practicing psychiatry without a license here, and you haven't really read up on this. Those with autism are frequently very difficult to "reach," and this does NOT translate to their distance being an indication that they have violent tendencies.

Where have you read that Adam Lanza had an anti-social personality disorder? Where have you read that I promote irresponsible gun ownership? What evidence do you have to support your claims beyond "Hindsight is 20/20"?

Produce evidence that Adam Lanza had violent tendencies and that somehow his mother should have known that he was going to do what he did.

I will produce evidence now that suggests that there was NO CLUE:

[Richard] Novia said he was surprised by the deadly rampage that left 20 children and seven adults, including Adam Lanza's mother, dead.

"He had some social disorders, poor personal skills," Novia said. "We felt strongly he could develop. He was highly intelligent, but how do you inject him in the system and develop him socially?"

Novia was not able to give specifics about the killer's specific condition, but said Adam Lanza did not have any violent tendencies.

"In a security aspect, it wouldn't be what he would do," he said. "It was what they might do to him."

Adam Lanza underwent psych evaluations in years past - WFSB 3 Connecticut