Summations Only

Thank you for the information on the Monash University shooting. If we include that in the statistics as a 'mass-shooting' (which it could very well have become) then that would be one mass-shooting, in the last 16 years. If we compare the previous decade's 11 mass shootings, from the time of the 1996 gun law, to the next decade's 1 mass shooting after the law took effect, then I think we can consider that statistically significant in regards to the effect that the gun law had on mass shootings. It should also be pointed out that the Australian government instituted more regulations in response to the Monash University shooting.Why you included arson in the discussion is confusing, and though I might speculate I would rather you tie it into the discussion than me trying to put words into your mouth. Do you have links to the data? I am curious where you got your data as my literature research did not show any statistically significant increase in gun crime after the gun law went into effect. It does show a steady decline in the use of firearms in robberies, starting from 1997, the year the gun law went into effect. (Notice figure 1 on page 2.) (I might also add that it was not an outright gun ban as you seem to imply. Rather it was a ban on only some types of firearms.)

Do you think that having a knife gives you the same ability to inflict a mass-killing as a firearm?

Just to be clear, I am not advocating a prohibition on private ownership, but rather a set of regulations that would look similar to those implemented by the U.K. and Australia.As far as guns making people safe, I would point to this paper. and this paperpaper.If you'd like to see a more comprehensive list.Edited by DBlevins, : No reason given.Edited by DBlevins, : Added additional literature.

For those who don't remember, Gabrielle Giffords was a member of the US House of Representatives who was gravely injured in a mass shooting near Tucson, Arizona, in early 2011. Six people were killed and thirteen injured.Spurred by the recent slaughter of 20 first-graders in at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Giffords recently spoke out about gun violence in an exclusive interview with Diane Sawyer. This excerpt about the dangers of good guys armed with guns is from the article Giffords, Kelly Say 'Enough' to Gun Violence on 2nd Anniversary of Tucson Shooting: The lesson here? If you have a chance to tackle a shooter, think twice. You may be mistaken for the attacker by a good guy with a gun.--Percy

I don't think more guns will necessarily reduce gun deaths, I've just left it open as a possibility.

But how many of us have heard about the theter shooting in San Antonio? Two wounded in theater shootingAn off-duty police officer was working at the theater and shot the gunman before they could kill anybody.

Hi CS,There's also the followup article: Breakup sparked theater shootout. The perpetrator's girlfriend broke up with him, he became angry and shot up the restaurant where she worked, then ran shooting into the adjacent movie theater. This is a perfect example of one of the scenarios I described, losing one's temper.Who among us never becomes angry or despondent at points in time in their life? Who among us can guarantee we will never become mentally ill or even deranged at some point in our life? Who among us can guarantee that no one in our household will never suffer these things? Who among us can perfectly secure a gun and its ammunition so it can never be misused? Who among us never fails to follow any gun safety rules? Who among us can guarantee that in the confusion of rapidly developing events that we can accurately tell good guys from bad?I think we're safest when guns are primarily in the hands of trained professionals, which is precisely the situation described in your article.--Percy

Nobody is suggesting that trained police officers should not have guns.Cops get exactly the sort of constant training necessary to respond in a situation like this.Concealed-carry civilians do not. See the video upthread. You've simply brought us a red herring.

So should we have police everywhere? Should every public venue, no matter the size, be patrolled by the police?"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither"

Civilians do take training cources before they concealed-carry.

Nope.

Not even remotely like police training. Again, see the video posted upthread.Cops get continual training, not just a once-and-done session. Their training focuses not only on marksmanship and care of the weapon, but also on responding to a crisis.Concealed-carry training in no way includes crisis training. They quite simply do not equip permit-holders with the skills needed to respond to a sudden, unexpected, immediate threat. Their reaction times are too slow, their physiological responses are untrained - not all training is the same, CS. Mandating a dozen or three hours at the shooting range with a 2-hour mandatory course on the rules and care of firearms has nothing whatsoever to do with actually using your gun in an emergency.In a crisis, a defensive shooter needs to be able to correctly distinguish friends from foes, to ensure that innocents are not in the line of fire in case of a miss, must have extremely rapid reaction time, must have muscle-memory-level training to take cover and draw the weapon, and so on, all in an extremely high-stress, panic-filled scenario. These are high-intensity skills - they require constant reinforcement, you lose them if you don't train for a month or so. That's not the sort of training that concealed-carry permits require. That sort of training isn't even offered.ABE:All you've done is add equivocation to your red herring. Edited by Rahvin, : No reason given.

Isn't this pretty much the action called for by the NRA after Sandy Hook?

No - the NRA isn't that smart.They want civilians to be armed. They want quarter-trained civilians with guns in enclosed spaces with a bunch of children in the case of schools and shopping malls.Cops would be a rather large step up from that.

I don't think it needs to be. I won't watch videos here at work. I don't think cops train as much as you think they do. How often are they required to train with firearms? I don't think it needs to. If the individual is unable to help, then they can just leave their gun holstered. If the scenario isn't conducive to using your firearm, you are in no way required to do so. It took me like 2 seconds to find websites offering that sort of training. After that all you have to do is practice.I'm just not seeing the picture you're painting: where cops are trained elites and civilians are bumbling idiots (that have to use their guns even if its dangerously).