Exactly what we were talking about GUN CONTROL!

[DiveDeepSix]

The prayer thread for the victims in the school catastrophe was not the place to discuss gun control laws, but it has turned that way. I started this one because the last topic I was talking about with Rothsdad was the possibility of our own government being behind some of these attacks to push gun control. I said in my post if you want to push an agenda get people up in arms, no pun intended, by creating chaos. Look at 911 when we not only gave up a lot of our rights for security many of us demanded it. This latest tragedy is the most disgusting act of cowardice I can even fathom and I can not as a father feel more sorrow for those who lost their children in this act of pure evil then I do right now. I opened this thread with no disrespect intended for the victims or their families, but to discuss something that concerns myself as well as many others here on DV judging by some of the posts I've read.

With that being said, looking at the almost daily shootings occurring all over our great nation, another again in a hospital, this is beginning to look like a pattern. If you think back to the theater shooting, he had some really high tech equipment the average person could never obtain without inside help or a lot of money which he didn't have. I do NOT believe in gun control but I do believe in personal responsibility, something this country has been lacking for a long time. I'd like to hear your thoughts my friends and even those who I disagree with we are all still Americans who I believe love this country.

http://news.msn.com/us/analysis-could-shooting-be-a-gun-control-tipping-point

Analysis: Could shooting be a gun-control tipping point?

Washington has been reluctant to take on tougher gun control laws in recent years, but that attitude may change after the horrific events in Connecticut.

WASHINGTON — The question surfaces each time a mass murder unfolds: Will this one change the political calculus in Washington against tougher gun control?

The answer, after the Virginia Tech killings, the attempted assassination of Gabby Giffords, the Colorado movie-theater attack, the Wisconsin Sikh temple shootings, and more: No.

But now?

The massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., the bloodiest attack against youngsters in the nation's history, stands as a possible tipping point after Washington's decade-long aversion even to talking about stricter gun laws.

So it seems in the stunned aftermath, judging from President Barack Obama's body language as much as his statement. "We have been through this too many times," said the famously composed president, this time moved to tears. "We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."

It remains to be seen whether Sandy Hook will break the usual cycle of universal shock fading into political reality. That reality is based on a combination of powerful gun lobbying and public opinion, which has shifted against tougher gun control and stayed that way. However lawmakers react this time, it's the president's call whether the issue fades again or takes its place alongside the legacy-shaping initiatives of his time, with all the peril that could mean for his party.

With the murder rate less than half what it was two decades ago, and violent crime down even more in that time, gun control has declined as a political issue.

But New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a gun control advocate, heard the familiar in Obama's initial response, despite the striking emotion.

"Not enough," Bloomberg said of Obama's words. "We have heard all the rhetoric before. What we have not seen is leadership — not from the White House and not from Congress. That must end today."

The Newtown shooter brought three guns into the school, and the weapons were registered to his slain mother, according to a law enforcement official who was not authorized to discuss information with reporters and spoke on condition of anonymity. The official said a Glock and a Sig Sauer, both pistols, and a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle were found in the school after the attack, and a fourth weapon was recovered outside.

One certainty in the weeks to come is that both parties in Washington will carefully watch public opinion on gun control and the Second Amendment, and whether any impact lasts.

Opposition to stricter laws has proved resilient. Firearms are in one-third or more of households and suspicion runs deep of an overbearing government whenever it proposes expanding federal authority. The argument of gun-rights advocates that firearm ownership is a bedrock freedom as well as a necessary option for self-defense has proved persuasive enough to dampen political enthusiasm for substantial change.

In July, a gunman opened fire on Aurora, Colo., theatergoers watching the Batman movie, "The Dark Knight Rises," killing 12 people. The next month, an Associated Press-National Constitution Center poll found that 49 percent of Americans felt laws limiting gun ownership infringe on the right to bear arms, while only 43 percent said such laws do not infringe on those rights.

By many measures, Americans have changed on the question since the 1990s, when people favored gun control over gun rights — by a 2-to-1 margin in polling after the 1999 Columbine High School massacre in Colorado. In a Gallup poll last year, 55 percent said gun laws should stay the same or be more lenient, while 43 percent wanted them toughened.

None of this is lost on Washington, where most Democrats long ago abandoned their advocacy of gun control, convinced that it is a losing issue for them. Obama has proposed reinstituting a federal ban on military-style assault weapons that lapsed years ago, but he's put no weight behind it, while signing laws letting people carry concealed weapons in national parks and in checked bags on Amtrak trains.

After the movie-theater attack, Obama declared "we should leave no stone unturned" to keep young people safe in a speech indicating he would challenge Congress to act on gun control. That expectation lasted for one day. The White House swiftly clarified that Obama would not propose stiffer gun laws this election year and favored more effective enforcement of existing law — a position hardly distinguishable from that of his Republican rival, Mitt Romney.

Likewise, early last year, Obama weighed in on guns after an assailant killed six people and wounded 13, shooting then-Rep. Giffords in the head outside a grocery store in Tucson, Ariz. The president called for "sound and effective steps" in gun laws as part of a "new discussion on how we can keep America safe for all our people." He soon went back to silence on the topic and gun-control advocates waited in vain for the steps.

With his last presidential campaign behind him, Obama is freer to take up contentious matters that he wouldn't touch when he was an incumbent seeking re-election. Odds are favorable that he will have at least one vacancy to fill on a Supreme Court now closely divided on gun cases.

The Aurora attack happened in the heat of the campaign, when Democrats wanted no trouble from gun owners. In its first official response to the killings, Obama's White House pledged to protect fundamental gun rights. Obama and his spokesmen never failed to couple his wish for "common-sense measures" with his devotion to the Second Amendment.

But after the massacre of children Friday, Obama spoke mainly of the anguish, and the need for action, and not at all about the right to bear arms.

By the standards of gun-control politics, that alone was a crack in the status quo.

[jonjon]

[fastang1111]

Could shooting be a gun-control tipping point?

YES ! its the only thing in this madness that makes since.

tim Mcveigh used fertlizer,911 terrorist used box cutters and planes, nazis used cynanide gas. Taking guns away from innocent people will NOT protect innocent people !

if people look into the history of this country they will find that the 2nd amendment wasnt just to keep and bear arms. It was to protect ourselves from tyranny in its government ! "Thomas Jefferson"

I am afraid history is about to repeat its self.

[jonjon]

Is it a coincidence that the Colorado Theater shooter was in a military vest and black fatigues and now the Newtown, Conn. Shooter was in a military vest and black fatigues?

If this ushers in gun control will the tactical vests be outlawed too?

[dontlop]

hey ya might as well outlaw airplanes too after 911.. its the objects not the people .. that plane crashed itself right into the trade centers ..

if they think at a time where people are going around shooting our children .. and the govt cannot stop it .. that they are going to take away our only protections .. their out of their minds ..

and dont say call the cops .. they all carry guns to protect themselves ... how come ?

the police come after the fact and do traffic control.. its to late .. i dont trust the police to protect me .. they do a terrible job at that .. police are good at some things ,,.like hiding and giving traffic tickets... they do some paper work .. and they will testify that the police report is accurate to the testomony they recieved ... ..its always after the crime is committed .. a cop shows up

[Bumper64]

I think it is funny that our Government and President are talking about us needing to give up our guns that we use to protect our families.

Question: Will our President and Government ask the Secrete Service to give up their guns that are to be used to protect them??

If not, what they are telling us is that their lives are more important than yours or mine or even our families!! Hmmmmmmmmmmm

They can kiss my #%# if they think I am not going to protect my family and friends as long as I have air in my lungs!

Just my personal opinion and not the opinion of Mod Bump!!

[bodiddily]

This is obviously a controversial topic with all sides of the argument claiming that their point of view is the most sensible. I live in the UK where we do have gun control and even our regular police officers do not carry weapons. It must be an obvious fact that the sheer availability of guns makes these tragic actions even more of a possibility.

[Rayzur]

This is obviously a controversial topic with all sides of the argument claiming that their point of view is the most sensible. I live in the UK where we do have gun control and even our regular police officers do not carry weapons. It must be an obvious fact that the sheer availability of guns makes these tragic actions even more of a possibility.

Its seemingly more obvious that the UK and the US are different cultures, with completely different antecedents. Indeed, I think a couple hundred years ago, a group of people left the UK because they saw things differently and established a republic reflecting those differences, played out over the past two centuries molding a people and country into a fiercely patriotic people who will not bend those basic principles.

I can't imagine patroling any street in the US as a law enforcement officer without a handgun. It's facinating, and remarkable that they can do so in the UK. Our politics are different, our governance very different, our economies are not in any way mirror images. For as much as we are similar, there are deep core differences in our making, and its not possible to eliminate the history engendering who we are as a country and people today.... either for the UK or the US.

People don't seem to get that much more than simply guns would have to be eliminated in order to produce the desired result, and that change would become something we would no longer recognize as America, were that to happen....

DeepDive, please go check out my post on Kennedy. JFK & NWO If it doesn't knock you off your chair, I'll buy ya a keg of beer next time I see ya (or give ya my Mares Raptors... now you know I'm serious )

If I ever waivered a micro second about the critical importance of protecting the right to bear arms... this speech eliminated any doubt. I unfortunately chose a funky stupid caption... and should have said, "Kennedy warned us this was coming so they killed him"... Helllll at this point, I'll throw in my Zeagle Ranger BC if you aren't a tad blown away after listening to his words.... This country may indeed be one of the last major obstacles to the NWO, and 50 years later, those bastids, are approaching our shores.

PS I've no idea why the linked video shows a picture of Kerry as its header, it has nothing whatsoever to do with him as an individual Close your eyes and just listen...

[tkeaton]

If there were to be restrictions on legal gun ownership does anyone with two brain cells believe that bad guys would cease using them? The best answer to a bad guy with a gun will always be a good guy with a gun. One teacher or aid with a handgun could have saved a lot of little lives in this scenario.

When I was in high school in southern West Virginia a lot of upper class-men who drove to school in pickups proudly displayed guns in window racks in unlocked trucks in the school parking area. Not one of them ever even considered doing something like this. Something's changed in the last 50 years and we all know what it is. God is a gentleman—when there is a demand by an individual or a nation that he leave he will do so. When goodness diminishes evil will fill the vacuum.

"The nations have sunk in the pit that they made; in the net that they hid, their own foot has been caught." (Psalm 9:15)

[haymon]

Ditto and amen.

[dog53]

All great responses. Bottom line guns do not think they are a inanimate object like a chain saw and they have to be operated. The only question is who will be behind the gun. A legal gun touting citizen or a gun toting thug.

[Cherysh]

Well, let me first say, I do not support a gun ban. This is a mental health issue, a human respect issue. Many hunters and "responsible" gun owners know what I am talking about. If you are the owner of a gun for protection, you hope you never have to use you gun on anyone, and there is a special code of conduct and respect for being resposible gun owners.

"IF" there were a gun ban, I say if, providing they didnt start a civil war by trying to ban guns, and take away more of our rights than ever. But can you imagine the underground business that would be constructed, our bordering neighbors and friends across the ocean would make a pretty penny in profits. Gang and mafias levels would rise just for the protection factor. And people like myself, a responsible gun owner, who learned the proper way to use firearms, and

Will go further to obtain a conceal carry permit. Laws do need to be changed to help protect against monsters and evils such as this kid. Your not going to stop guns from being here in the us by banning then, you are going to drive illegal gun trades through the roof, and render giod people helpless to defend ourselves from people like this. It will be rampant and out of control, just like drugs. I have heard so many argument's as to why I dont need ti own a gun. From gun laws were put into place back when there were gun slingers, and we didnt have semi automatic weapons. These are different, I can speak for the old west, I can only be in this moment and take responsiblity for myself and protect myself and my beautiful 4 year old daughter. I would rather have have my Glock on my side, than have it forcefully taken me.

[McHales Navy]

I could say so much about this topic. There is no easy answer.

Many old folks have said and posted on other blogs that these gun problems today were not an issue when they were young.

Nobody brought a gun into a school or killed anyone back when they were in school.

In the show Bonanza, Ben Cartwright & his sons all had guns and used them responsibly.

We are obviously in a different time and different world than the days of Bonanza. (Which is a fictitious show).

But the point is, our society is broken morally & spiritually.

There were guns in Colonial days, and Bonanza days. Did someone bring a gun into the schoolhouse in 'Little House on the Prarie' show? I don't think so. Probably didn't happen even in real life.

Now, should there have been guns available to a person with mental health issues?

No.

No more than I leave my refrigerator door open and leave a cake on the floor, and leave my dog alone in my house.

People should exercise common sense.

For people that don't have common sense, you have to do it for them.

[Gamble101]

Anybody who believes this was a plot to control guns has got to the biggest idiot on earth.

[RodandStaff]

Baseball bats "kill" more people than guns.... bad bats... bad, bad!!!

If they want our guns .... what's next? ... Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and oh yeah... well they already bought out Chevrolet!!!

[Markinsa]

I stole this from one of Yota's post this morning:

Knife-wielding man injures 22 children in China

Reuters – Fri, Dec 14, 2012

BEIJING (Reuters) - A knife-wielding man slashed 22 children and an adult at an elementary school in central China on Friday, state media reported, the latest in a series of attacks on schoolchildren in the country.

The man attacked the children at the gate of a school in Chenpeng village in Henan province, the Xinhua news agency reported.

Police arrested a 36-year-old man, identified as villager Min Yingjun, Xinhua said. It did not give further details of the extent of the injuries.

There have been a series of attacks on schools and schoolchildren around China in recent years, some by people who have lost their jobs or felt left out of the country's economic boom.

The rash of violence has prompted public calls for more measures to protect the young in a country where many couples only have one child.

In 2010, a man slashed 28 children, two teachers and a security guard in a kindergarten in eastern China.

(Reporting by Terril Yue Jones; editing by Jonathan Standing) http://news.yahoo.co...-064458804.html

Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/136806-knife-wielding-man-injures-22-children-in-china/#ixzz2FE1FYKRN

-

[pokerplayer]

I am paralyzed by the fact that certain groups believe gun control is the answer !!! The only real group wanting gun control are criminals. They know then that they have little to fear from law abiding and packing honest citizens.

pp

[Lostenso]

I stole this from one of Yota's post this morning:

Knife-wielding man injures 22 children in China

Reuters – Fri, Dec 14, 2012

BEIJING (Reuters) - A knife-wielding man slashed 22 children and an adult at an elementary school in central China on Friday, state media reported, the latest in a series of attacks on schoolchildren in the country.

The man attacked the children at the gate of a school in Chenpeng village in Henan province, the Xinhua news agency reported.

Police arrested a 36-year-old man, identified as villager Min Yingjun, Xinhua said. It did not give further details of the extent of the injuries.

There have been a series of attacks on schools and schoolchildren around China in recent years, some by people who have lost their jobs or felt left out of the country's economic boom.

The rash of violence has prompted public calls for more measures to protect the young in a country where many couples only have one child.

In 2010, a man slashed 28 children, two teachers and a security guard in a kindergarten in eastern China.

(Reporting by Terril Yue Jones; editing by Jonathan Standing) http://news.yahoo.co...-064458804.html

Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/136806-knife-wielding-man-injures-22-children-in-china/#ixzz2FE1FYKRN

-

22 people are injured by a knife. 26 people killed by guns. Neither are preferable but I would rather be injured than dead! Damage control goes to the knife.

[TonyDownTheShore]

Millions of guns out there in the hands of millions of people that shouldn't have them, nuff said, still think there shouldn't be a better set of laws?

People bring the fact that people die everyday from different reasons, that's life, but if we can control one of the way people die why not? Just like drug addicts or alcoholics always have an excuse for why they do what they do, gun lovers will always find an excuse or a reason to have a gun.

Millions of people go on everyday living without guns, don't get me wrong we all should have the right to protect our families and friends, but if we made it harder for everybody to get a gun there would be a lot less guns in the hands of the crazy people, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Let the negs fly it won't make a difference in my life.

[parmenio]

Remember, the marxists will "never let a serious crisis go to waste."

[jonjon]

[Markinsa]

Millions of guns out there in the hands of millions of people that shouldn't have them, nuff said, still think there shouldn't be a better set of laws?

People bring the fact that people die everyday from different reasons, that's life, but if we can control one of the way people die why not? Just like drug addicts or alcoholics always have an excuse for why they do what they do, gun lovers will always find an excuse or a reason to have a gun.

Millions of people go on everyday living without guns, don't get me wrong we all should have the right to protect our families and friends, but if we made it harder for everybody to get a gun there would be a lot less guns in the hands of the crazy people, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Let the negs fly it won't make a difference in my life.

I think your millions number is a great deal overstated. I would submit a small percentage shouldn't own guns. If these "millions" were a threat, you would see a much larger incendence of crimes with guns. Don't take away others' rights to protect themselves because you think the sky is falling. If someone wants to commit a crime they will do it with whatever weapon they have close to them.

-

[desimo]

I must agree with Deepsix. I have been thinking that for a long time. The Okalahoma City bombing was a big point in my thinking in that manner. You might remember how the roof tar paper was blowing in the wind because it had not been blown off, the building fell from underneath. The normal blast flow is up and out but this was a downward blast projection. This, therefore, had to have been a shape charge. There is no way that a poopbomb in a renter truck was able to form the projection that the OK City bomb produced. Each time that there has been a major crime such as Sandy, OK City, Columbine, Virginia Tech, Colorado; all the buzzards of gun control swirl before even the smell of gun powder leaves the air. If you take a look at so much of the legislations that have passed it is because the general public has been made to believe that there is no other answer than for Congress to act. It does not have to do with any facts, just that the Congress is acting in response to emotion. Emotion of the general public means votes and looking like they have now 'done the will of the people'. Gun control is a major issue in America. Under Clinton the military was polled if they would disarm Americans and 1/3 said yes, 1/3 said no and 1/3 said it depended on the facts. They know that the military is probably not the best source to disarm Americans. This is probably why they are kissing up to the UN. If the UN creates the bill or treaty then then UN can do the disarming. Americans will shoot on UN troops while not probably shoot against our own troops. The results would be civil war. Personally I believe this has been the agenda from the start. Our currency is droping. We have a national debt that all the discussion of balancing the budget and removing the debt is a joke because it cannot even keep up with the level of interest. Government is now increasing in all aspects from medical, food, transportation, communications, etc. I truly hate to be writing this because I used to be a strong believer in my government. Now I deeply love my country but have no regard for my government nor have any faith or trust in my government.

[twolincs]

Guns Don't shoot people . . . People shoot people . . nuff said !!!!

[jonjon]