Conn. Heavily Controls Guns : Result : 20 Children Slaughtered

[koshergrl]

Either we have a RIGHT to bear arms or we have a GOVERNMENT GRANTED ****PRIVILEGE***** to bear arms.

If the government is the one who decides where we can bear arms, who can bear arms, what we can defend with those arms then we have a ******* PRIVILEGE'

The bastards in Hartford decided that the little children precious lives were not worth defending by designating Sandy Hook Elementary School as a GUN FREE ZONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

.

Did you ever in this thread show us that these mass shootings are more likely to occur in heavily gun controlled states than they are in lenient states?

I missed that. Link me back to that proof.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf

Myth: Gun availability is what is causing school shootings
Fact: Schoolyard shootings have been occurring since at least 1974, so it is not a new phenomenon due to increases in gun ownership.183

Fact: More than 50% of these terrorists started thinking about their assaults two or more weeks before the shooting, and 75% planned-out their attacks.184

Thoughts: In rural areas, guns are everywhere and children are taught to shoot at young ages – yet these areas are almost devoid of schoolyard shootings. Clearly, availability is not the issue.​

In any school parking lot, there is likely to be at least one vehicle with a loaded gun in it.

And the shooters know this.

The school shooting phenomenon is another symptom of the progressive disease that has permeated our culture.

 

[Katzndogz]

If someone in the office had had a firearm, the only dead person would be the shooter.

He would have shot himself like he did when he knew that armed men had entered the building.

What's the difference between the theater shooting in Aurora Colorado and a theater shooting in Texas?

He opened fire, shooting one man in the chest, before Antu says an off duty sheriff's deputy who was working security at the theater shot him once.

Read more: Terror at Southwest Side Movie Theater, as Gunman, Patron Shot in Lobby - NewsRadio 1200 WOAI, San Antonio

Gun control equals an increased body count.

 

[daveman]

Their laws really werent able to prevent this.

You know why? That weapon used for the massacre was stolen.

Conn has no laws regarding the immediate report of a stolen firearm.



The owner of the gun should be charged for not contacting the authorities in this situation and letting them know that her gun was stolen.

It's difficult to contact the authorities when you've been murdered.

Perhaps every police department should hold a seance.

 

[Katzndogz]

At some point conservatives just have to give it up and recognize that liberals want increased gun violence, just by the criminals. They want more dead people as long as those people are innocent victims with no means of defending themselves. That's why it's the lberals who want to blame the lack of understanding and compassion for the mentally ill rather than taking them off the streets. Throw money at the insane and that will restore them to functioning.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Either we have a RIGHT to bear arms or we have a GOVERNMENT GRANTED ****PRIVILEGE***** to bear arms.

If the government is the one who decides where we can bear arms, who can bear arms, what we can defend with those arms then we have a ******* PRIVILEGE'

The bastards in Hartford decided that the little children precious lives were not worth defending by designating Sandy Hook Elementary School as a GUN FREE ZONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

.

Did you ever in this thread show us that these mass shootings are more likely to occur in heavily gun controlled states than they are in lenient states?

I missed that. Link me back to that proof.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf

Myth: Gun availability is what is causing school shootings
Fact: Schoolyard shootings have been occurring since at least 1974, so it is not a new phenomenon due to increases in gun ownership.183

Fact: More than 50% of these terrorists started thinking about their assaults two or more weeks before the shooting, and 75% planned-out their attacks.184

Thoughts: In rural areas, guns are everywhere and children are taught to shoot at young ages – yet these areas are almost devoid of schoolyard shootings. Clearly, availability is not the issue.​

The Luby's massacre in 1991 took place in TEXAS. Is that a heavily gun controlled state?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If someone in the office had had a firearm, the only dead person would be the shooter.

He would have shot himself like he did when he knew that armed men had entered the building.

What's the difference between the theater shooting in Aurora Colorado and a theater shooting in Texas?

He opened fire, shooting one man in the chest, before Antu says an off duty sheriff's deputy who was working security at the theater shot him once.

Read more: Terror at Southwest Side Movie Theater, as Gunman, Patron Shot in Lobby - NewsRadio 1200 WOAI, San Antonio

Gun control equals an increased body count.

And the Luby's cafeteria shooting in TEXAS, in 1991, 20+ people killed,

what's the difference between that and Newtown, Connecticut?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives keep saying that teachers are overpaid, now they want teachers to take a pay cut, and add armed guard to their job description.

Brilliant.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How about a federal law that says every public facility accommodating a minimum of X number of people (X being 50, 100, whatever is decided)

will be required to have armed guards on duty at all times the facility is open, the number of guards required based on the size of the facility,

the cost of which will be the responsibility of the business owners, if it's private,

or paid for by a special federal tax if it's a government building.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How about a federal law that says every public facility accommodating a minimum of X number of people (X being 50, 100, whatever is decided)

will be required to have armed guards on duty at all times the facility is open, the number of guards required based on the size of the facility,

the cost of which will be the responsibility of the business owners, if it's private,

or paid for by a special federal tax if it's a government building.

Gee, don't any of the 'arm the people' crowd like my idea?

What's the matter, does safety without gun control lose its charm when you put a price tag on it?

Is the real agenda of the pro-gun crowd DO NOTHING?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If someone in the office had had a firearm, the only dead person would be the shooter.

He would have shot himself like he did when he knew that armed men had entered the building.

What's the difference between the theater shooting in Aurora Colorado and a theater shooting in Texas?

He opened fire, shooting one man in the chest, before Antu says an off duty sheriff's deputy who was working security at the theater shot him once.

Read more: Terror at Southwest Side Movie Theater, as Gunman, Patron Shot in Lobby - NewsRadio 1200 WOAI, San Antonio

Gun control equals an increased body count.

And the Luby's cafeteria shooting in TEXAS, in 1991, 20+ people killed,

what's the difference between that and Newtown, Connecticut?

I guess the silence says that there was no difference. So much for gun control causing the problem.

 

[alpine]

So...you believe it's morally superior to be murdered than to defend yourself and/or others with a firearm.

No see your framing the question wrong, your trying to frame it like faux news did. The question and answer is not add more guns to make people safer, if I was to answer the question the way you frame it, of course I'm gonna want a gun to shoot back. I don't thing as I said though your asking the right question, should he have had access to the guns in the first place? No is the answer, then I wouldn't need a gun my self to defend with.

He tried to purchase a rifle, and was denied. He stole his mother's guns.

Looks like the system worked. It disallowed him from purchasing a weapon. So he stole weapons (even though stealing is illegal) and used them to commit murder (which is also illegal).

Not sure what else could have been done to prevent this from a gun-control point of view.

So, having people on-site trained and equipped to deal with such situations seems to be the only rational option.

And the facts stands solid like a rock, if guns were not sold in grocery stores, his mother would not have had a gun, and yet 20 kids would still be alive, just like all other people that have been killed by legally sold arms till to date.

I have been reading posts for days now and nobody ever could make any argument to falsify this fact. All speculations, all fooling themselves and each other.

If I was the father of any of those kids (which I feel like one when I think about it); I don't own guns, I don't want to own guns. So I don't care about guns. I don't care about your right to acquire guns either. Who the **** are you. Screw you. My kid is the most important thing in this life. If they are going to be safer without your guns laying around then **** you all, **** your weapons too. You can take your guns and shove it up yours.

Peace...

 

[saveliberty]

The fact some of these good people own guns, helps keep YOU safe. Crimnals have to wonder if you're armed too. Do you love your family enough to defend them? Have you thought about how you can accomplish that? Hope you never have to find out Alpine.

 

[Uncensored2008]

When you limit the right of people to bear arms, when you erode human rights, people are vulnerable. Progressives promote and legislate for a system in which only the strong and violent have *rights*. This is the result.

I know this; when I was a child in the 60's - guns were not restricted in any way. But there were no mass shootings.

Now we have strict gun control, and shootings daily.

We also had a culture war that the good guys lost. Ethics, values, and morals have been purged from our society. Gangsta is the goal - so cool. Ripping off suckas and lying to da foos is how we roll, homie - as a nation.

Anyone see a connection?

 

[daveman]

Did you ever in this thread show us that these mass shootings are more likely to occur in heavily gun controlled states than they are in lenient states?

I missed that. Link me back to that proof.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf

Myth: Gun availability is what is causing school shootings
Fact: Schoolyard shootings have been occurring since at least 1974, so it is not a new phenomenon due to increases in gun ownership.183

Fact: More than 50% of these terrorists started thinking about their assaults two or more weeks before the shooting, and 75% planned-out their attacks.184

Thoughts: In rural areas, guns are everywhere and children are taught to shoot at young ages – yet these areas are almost devoid of schoolyard shootings. Clearly, availability is not the issue.​

The Luby's massacre in 1991 took place in TEXAS. Is that a heavily gun controlled state?

Let's look at some facts. You will hate this.

Luby's massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first victim was local veterinarian Michael Griffith, 48, who ran to the driver's side of the pickup truck to offer assistance to the driver after the truck crashed through the window. Hennard also approached 32-year-old Suzanna Hupp and her parents. Hupp reached for her .38 revolver in her purse, only to realize she had left it in her vehicle.

--


Consequences

In response to the massacre,[5] the Texas Legislature in 1995 passed a shall-issue gun law, which requires that all qualifying applicants be issued a Concealed Handgun License (the state's required permit to carry concealed weapons), removing the personal discretion of the issuing authority to deny such licenses. To qualify for a license, one must be free-and-clear of crimes, attend a minimum 10-hour class taught by a state-certified instructor, pass a 50-question test, show proficiency in a 50-round shooting test, and pass two background tests, one shallow and one deep. The license costs $240 to $290, depending on the added instructor's fee.

The law had been campaigned for by Suzanna Hupp, who was present at the time of the massacre where both of her parents were shot and killed. She later expressed regret for obeying the law by leaving her firearm in her car rather than keeping it on her person due to the fact that it could have cost her her chiropractic license.[6]​

Hupp could have ended the shooting after only 1 victim. She would have had to have broken the law by doing so.

Funny how you think you had a point, innit?

 

[The Professor]

If someone in the office had had a firearm, the only dead person would be the shooter.

maybe, maybe not.

You proved the point. No one will ever know what would have happened if people in the school were armed. It may have prevented death, maybe not. But one thing is certain, without the ability to properly defend themselves against an armed assailant, the outcome was as certain as it was tragic.

Question (I don't really expect an answer):

If the shooter knew that those at the school were armed, would he still have gone on his rampage? I'll give the the only honest answer: no one knows for sure. However since there is at least the POSSIBILITY that innocent lives would have been spared if the shooter THOUGHT he would be met with armed resistance, then gun control was responsible - at least in part - for the carnage.

These kids were not killed because the killer was armed. The were killed because the shooter was armed an no one else was. It is a fact beyond the possibility of rational debate that there will always be those who intend harm. The only question is what to do with them. Do we defend ourselves against them or make ourselves more vulnerable?

 

[daveman]

How about a federal law that says every public facility accommodating a minimum of X number of people (X being 50, 100, whatever is decided)

will be required to have armed guards on duty at all times the facility is open, the number of guards required based on the size of the facility,

the cost of which will be the responsibility of the business owners, if it's private,

or paid for by a special federal tax if it's a government building.

Gee, don't any of the 'arm the people' crowd like my idea?

What's the matter, does safety without gun control lose its charm when you put a price tag on it?

Is the real agenda of the pro-gun crowd DO NOTHING?

There's no need for armed guards if citizens are allowed to concealed carry.

Dumbass.

Remind me again...what makes you think you're anything but a dumbass? Because, you know -- you're a dumbass.

 

[daveman]

No see your framing the question wrong, your trying to frame it like faux news did. The question and answer is not add more guns to make people safer, if I was to answer the question the way you frame it, of course I'm gonna want a gun to shoot back. I don't thing as I said though your asking the right question, should he have had access to the guns in the first place? No is the answer, then I wouldn't need a gun my self to defend with.

He tried to purchase a rifle, and was denied. He stole his mother's guns.

Looks like the system worked. It disallowed him from purchasing a weapon. So he stole weapons (even though stealing is illegal) and used them to commit murder (which is also illegal).

Not sure what else could have been done to prevent this from a gun-control point of view.

So, having people on-site trained and equipped to deal with such situations seems to be the only rational option.

And the facts stands solid like a rock, if guns were not sold in grocery stores, his mother would not have had a gun, and yet 20 kids would still be alive, just like all other people that have been killed by legally sold arms till to date.

I have been reading posts for days now and nobody ever could make any argument to falsify this fact. All speculations, all fooling themselves and each other.

If I was the father of any of those kids (which I feel like one when I think about it); I don't own guns, I don't want to own guns. So I don't care about guns. I don't care about your right to acquire guns either. Who the **** are you. Screw you. My kid is the most important thing in this life. If they are going to be safer without your guns laying around then **** you all, **** your weapons too. You can take your guns and shove it up yours.

Peace...

Oh, so YOU know how to get criminals to obey the law.

What's your plan?

 

[alpine]

The fact some of these good people own guns, helps keep YOU safe. Crimnals have to wonder if you're armed too. Do you love your family enough to defend them? Have you thought about how you can accomplish that? Hope you never have to find out Alpine.

So, you will protect me from... another gun owner ha. So I have to be grateful to you because everybody in this country can get guns from their grocery store easily, just like you did, but how lucky I am you live in my neighborhood and you are a good enough guy???

Wow, impressed. God bless you then...

Please don't start with the illegal gun trade and fool yourselves. Just accept the fact that people die because guns are easy to access, and it is easy to access because you like to have one. That's so simple and obvious. Rest is just clogging the whole discussion into silly details just because again, you like to have weapons and trying to find a way out of this mess.

Sorry but as I said before, I don't care. Anybody who says that will take all your guns away from you, is very welcomed by me, with all my heart. I couldn't care less about your hobbies...

 

[alpine]

He tried to purchase a rifle, and was denied. He stole his mother's guns.

Looks like the system worked. It disallowed him from purchasing a weapon. So he stole weapons (even though stealing is illegal) and used them to commit murder (which is also illegal).

Not sure what else could have been done to prevent this from a gun-control point of view.

So, having people on-site trained and equipped to deal with such situations seems to be the only rational option.

And the facts stands solid like a rock, if guns were not sold in grocery stores, his mother would not have had a gun, and yet 20 kids would still be alive, just like all other people that have been killed by legally sold arms till to date.

I have been reading posts for days now and nobody ever could make any argument to falsify this fact. All speculations, all fooling themselves and each other.

If I was the father of any of those kids (which I feel like one when I think about it); I don't own guns, I don't want to own guns. So I don't care about guns. I don't care about your right to acquire guns either. Who the **** are you. Screw you. My kid is the most important thing in this life. If they are going to be safer without your guns laying around then **** you all, **** your weapons too. You can take your guns and shove it up yours.

Peace...

Oh, so YOU know how to get criminals to obey the law.

What's your plan?

Oh, so you will stop the criminals ha. You think you are one of those super heroes or something?

If letting people acquire guns was the answer to criminal activity, USA would be the safest place on earth. I know for a fact that it is far from it because every psychopath can get a killing machine like they get popcorns in a movie theater.

 

[Bill Angel]

I know this; when I was a child in the 60's - guns were not restricted in any way. But there were no mass shootings.

Now we have strict gun control, and shootings daily.

We also had a culture war that the good guys lost. Ethics, values, and morals have been purged from our society. Gangsta is the goal - so cool. Ripping off suckas and lying to da foos is how we roll, homie - as a nation.

Anyone see a connection?

I agree. I was a child in the 60's also, and we played games like Cowboys and Indians and used cap pistols to shoot each other. But such roleplay games didn't morph over into acts of mass murder against members of our community.