Summations Only

I would disagree. The matter and type of armament that 'The People' have at their disposal is, at best, a minor nuisance to a well armed military and I don't believe it in any way deters the government. The bigger 'deterrent' in my mind is our voting system. Politicians are placating to those with the loudest voices and the biggest wallets. I don't think for one second they consider armed citizens as being any type of threat.Perhaps in the past, it might have carried more weight. But to be honest, even when individuals and groups have had access to weapons that placed them on near-equal footing with a tyrannical state, it at best only delayed the inevitable.

Isn't one of the larger issues here the idiotic 'Zero Tolerance' policies that now exist in our schools? From what I have seen, it almost appears as though school administrators are actually been incentivized to not think critically anymore. Whether it be a perceived bomb threat, some phrase on a T-shirt, making a gun shape with your thumb and forefinger, it's all part in parcel with this notion that every possible situation must be handled as if it is a worst case scenario.Did the school over-react here? Of course. But that seems to be the norm nowadays.

Could not agree more. In fact, this is an argument I have been making in deference to the NSA's spying program. As someone who performs business analysis as part of their job, I am fully cognizant of what happens when you attempt to track too many parameters and data points. It invariably becomes 'noise'. With that, your metrics are meaningless and are likely leading to false positives far more than they lead to net tangibles.

Wasn't the teacher who ultimately 'sounded the alarm' an English teacher?I may sound like a condescending douche, but I would not put English teachers too high on the rating scale when it comes to technical acumen. My suspicion is that is part of the problem here. A teacher with limited knowledge of electronics and circuitry makes a judgement call likely referencing what they 'thought' bombs looked like based on hours of television programming.But as I indicated, to play a little devil's advocate, the zero tolerance policies are exacerbating the situation with regards to these knee-jerk reactions to anything that might seem marginally threatening. To make matters worse, this school isn't located too far from that 'Draw Mohammed' exhibit that occurred in Texas where two gunman tried to shoot up the place but were shot first by security. Naturally, the local populace is probably a little on edge as a result.Then again, it is Texas too. Shoot first and ask questions later. And never go jogging without your firearm lest a rabid coyote crosses your path.

As a gun owner myself, I think the NRA is the best example of an organization that was hijacked by some shrewd corporate lobbyists and now exists merely as an extension of the gun industry to further their own agenda.It certainly is a far cry from how it originated, which was an organization that existed to provide classes on safety and the proper handling and storage of firearms.The end result is it caters to the fringe elements of the gun-nut crowd as a means to and end of helping to keep Colt, Winchester and Smith&Wesson making money hand over fist.From my perspective regarding the list you provided, here is my feedback:

• Background checks for all gun purchases: Absolutely. Along with closing the loophole regarding gun purchases at gun shows.
• A central database for gun purchases: Agreed.
• Expanding the ATF's capabilities: Fine. So long as they don't do another stupid thing like Fast and Furious; i.e. chips in guns that are sold to drug cartels.
• Research into gun safety: Could not agree more. I want Judge Dredd type capabilities with 'smart guns'. I think that would save countless lives, especially young children who get a hold of their parent's guns.

Some others I would add:

• Forbid the selling of guns to anyone on the terrorist watch list. By the way, the NRA is against this too.
• Restrict magazine sizes and severely curtail the sale of assault rifles. Guns in the hands of the general public should be for defense, not offense.
• Severely increase the penalties to criminals for using guns in the commission of a crime. And if anyone wonders how we will make room in our prisons, that is easy. End the stupid drug war.

That's just off the top of my head. Also, start educating the public regarding that tired old rationale for being armed to the teeth because you need to overthrow the government. That is the most asinine, anachronistic concept we have in place today. I am sorry, but you could be armed to the teeth with thousands of guns and millions of rounds of ammo, but it won't mean a hill of beans when you see ten M1A1 Abrahams tanks at your doorstep. You might as well arm yourself with Nerf guns for all the good it will do you.

To further the point, the notion is that certain weapons are capable of tremendous amounts of death and destruction. So how do we, as a society, draw a line in the sand with regards to which weapons the general populace should have access to?One of the primary arguments that gun proponents make is that the citizenry needs to be armed in order to have the capability of fighting back against an oppressive or corrupt government. By extension of that logic, that would seem to indicate that the citizenry should be given access to the same types of weapons the military has at their disposal.Now I ask, even the most ardent gun supporter, is that really what you honestly want? Do we want to foster a scenario where individuals who have the funds are free to purchase any form of military ordinance they like? i.e. tanks, fighter jets, missiles, bazookas, stinger launch systems, SAMS, land mines, grenades, VX gas rockets, etc?The point here is: we are living in the 21st century. There are weapons and technology available that the Founding Fathers could scarcely conceive of. Would they have drafted the second amendment in its current guise if they had known? Hard to say. But I would argue they DID take that notion into account by injecting one specific word in the 2nd amendment:

quote:

---

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

---

Keyword: REGULATEDI would echo what others here have stipulated: we are living in a time where a single individual can wreak havoc with a small arsenal of weapons at their disposal. Simply shrugging it off as a consequence of our existing gun laws drives home the point that they indeed do need to change. And Congress (both Repubs AND Dems) need to grow a pair and stand up to the lunatic fringe in the NRA.

If there is any upside (for him anyway), at least he didn't blow off his own junk. Which has happened in the past with other 'responsible gun owners'.

I certainly am not. And I am a gun owner.I was watching BBC news yesterday and they were interviewing a couple of gun shop owners out of Tennessee. Interestingly, they were actually very much in favor of Obama's assertions because they indicated it would likely increase business for them and reduce the likelihood of guns being transferred between parties through the back channels.Like anything though, the fringe is usually the loudest, so their voices are the ones being utilized on our cable news outlets like CNN, MSNBC or Fox. Similar to other discussions or debates in our country, like abortion, gay rights, etc., it seems our news agencies are more concerned with putting on a spectacle as opposed to actually having a cogent discussion on a particular topic.

That idea is actually borrowed from Judge Dredd comics. For those that don't know, Judge Dredd is a futuristic law enforcement officer in a dystopian future. In a similar fashion, his gun is coded genetically to only him and other 'judges'. i.e. other cops. If a criminal tries to use his gun against him, it won't fire and will incapacitate the criminal. Sometimes its electric shocks; sometimes the gun actually just detonates and kills the criminal. A little overboard, but hey, its the comics. Not from me. But the NRA is opposed to this type of technology as they feel it is a 'slippery slope' to having the government mandate that all guns behave this way.

The shooter was also interviewed by the FBI twice. I believe he was on the terrorist watch list. Yet thanks to the idiots at the NRA, they repeatedly shoot down (no pun intended), any legislation that would forbid the selling of firearms to those on the terrorist watch list.Also disconcerting to realize that this guy was working as an armed security guard since 2007!Either way, sad day for the nation and especially hard on those of us who live in Central Florida.

Technically, all guns are designed to kill. That is there function. With that being said, there is a logical dividing line between a weapon that is more about personal defense than personal offense.Handguns for example are meant to be lightweight and have limited ranges. The army (as you well know), considers them 'side arms'. They are a weapon the soldier will turn to if their primary weapon (their rifle) is out of ammunition or malfunctions. But no one is going to fight a war with a handgun.Assault rifles exemplify their function in their name: they are designed for assaults. They have long ranges and are not meant to function in a defensive role. I actually don't think any of these types of weapons should be available to the general public as I put them in the same class as bazookas or RPGs. They are weapons of war, pure and simple.And even I will admit that handguns are somewhat on the fence regarding their function. Granted, they are in the 'defensive' camp, but they are also easily concealed, which makes them often used in crimes.I have a few good friends that are cops and all of them have told me the same thing: the best gun for home defense, if you feel you need one, is a pump action shotgun loaded with non-lethal ammunition. Like rubber pellets, low grade bird shot or even rock salt. Ultimately, it isn't even the ammunition that matters. It is the shotgun's iconic sound. The cop mentioned to me that the moment any intruder hears that distinctive 'click-click' of a pump action shotgun, they will bolt.On a side note, I am quite interested to hear from the FBI the circumstances of why this lunatic was interviewed twice in 2013. Clearly something tipped them off.

Our laws are never going to change until we change the perception in this country of needing to be armed in order to overthrow the government. That is the core philosophical argument used by right wing nut job militias. Their military level weapons are required 'just in case' they have to band together in case the government becomes corrupt.This concept is so fucking asinine that it reaches a level of absurdity that I can scarcely comprehend at this stage. We saw this behavior with Cliven Bundy and his band of inbred hillbilly jackoffs that were arming themselves and preparing for the 'evil government' coming to usurp their land. And it wasn't even their land!Personally, if I was president, I would have been a total dick at that stage. I would have sent a couple of Apache gunships and a few M1A2 Abrahams tanks to that location. Not as a means to escalate violence, but as a reality check for these nimrods. Take a look at the fire-power that the US military has at it's disposal. What are you possibly going to do against that even with your friggen AR-15? You could shoot at that parked tank all day and the soldiers inside would be pissing themselves laughing at your stupidity as the bullets bounce off. You might was well arm yourselves with Nerf guns for all the good it will do you.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36563337

quote:

---

Four proposals were brought before the Senate after 49 people died in an attack on a gay nightclub in Florida.

​

But Democratic and Republican senators voted along party lines, blocking each other's bills.

​

Senators strongly disagreed about how to prevent more attacks happening in future.

​

Republican Senator John Cornyn said: "Our colleagues want to make this about gun control when what we should be making this about is the fight to eliminate the Islamic extremism that is the root cause for what happened in Orlando.

​

"My colleagues in many ways want to treat the symptoms without fighting the disease."

---

He does have a point. Although I would call 'the disease' the sheer stupidity of the average Republican Senator.

As a gun owner, I concur. I believe training is a core component of firearm safety and usage. And not just general training on being safe with the weapon. Training pertaining to how to respond in various situations. That could help mitigate the knee-jerk reactions that result in people drawing their firearm at the slightest inclination. And by the way, that includes police as well. Too many instances of a 'shoot first ask questions later' mentality in this country. This is a no brainer. I would also go further and provide more provisions and support to families who have family members that exhibit mental health problems. Also a no brainer. The NRA would fight this tooth and nail, but they are beyond reproach at this stage.A few things I would add:- No guns for anyone on the terrorist watch list.
- Ban on assault weapons; guns in the hands of citizens should be defensive in nature. Assault weapons are the the very definition of an offensive weapon.
- Stricter penalties for the use of a gun in the commission of a crime.

Sorry, but I disagree. A Tae Kwon Do kick can be lethal. But I wouldn't call the usage of Tae Kwon Do as being a problem in defending oneself. It is a response to an attack. If a gun is used in response to an attack, it is being used in a defensive posture. Police use their guns for defense all the time.