Shooting in Newtown, Connecticut Elementary School

Easy to argue black is white but the issues are very obvious.

Very sad but entirely expected until the denial stops ... pity the kids, teachers and families.
 
As this thread has now morphed to consideration of contributing factors, & the inevitable search for answers, perhaps as somewhat of an outsider to this debate, I can chime in with a few thoughts.

In a country where a very rich & influential lobby opposes mandatory safety catches on guns as being "unconstitutional", yet has a firearms related child homicide rate (by percentage of population) greater than the rest of the top 25 industrialized nations combined, you know any attempt to afford change is nigh impossible. The priorities are just too skewed to make headway.

Mandatory safety catch on a cigarette lighter = no problem.
Mandatory safety catch on a lethal device that would go some considerable way to preventing the 5 or so daily firearms related child deaths & injuries in the US = big problem. Go figure--

Clearly, any degree of gun control will never prevent a determined & resourced deranged individual from carrying out their intended crime. Same applies to terrorism. Ring fencing soft targets won't work either. Take all statistics in context & with a pinch of salt, but when the numbers stack up to be so hugely disparate, to deny that firearms proliferation isn't at least a very significant factor, is to ignore the overwhelmingly obvious. Saving lives of those outside of these dreadful high profile events must be the aim of all right thinking Americans. Preventing the multiple horrific, the exceptional, is a difficult one to win, but the daily slaughter that passes underneath the press radar can surely be reduced by a change of emphasis. Society is increasingly obsessed with protecting the rights of the individual. That's fine, but when upholding those individual rights is to the detriment of the greater society, one has to question personal motivation.

Adjusted for population size, & excluding suicide, the firearms related death rate in the US is 92 times greater than the UK. The UK is no model place, I can assure you, but in global terms, it's society demographic is surprisingly similar to that of the US, the only significant difference being it's gun laws. A multiplication of 92 times the death rate guys, that's no statistical "blip".

Great post Andy!

Tie this issue in with the lack of mental health laws, lack of control over kids inside and outside of schools, political correctness that binds us to dealing with these issues head-on is reflected not only in this sad tragedy, but society at large.

I've witnessed more rage issues in a simple 4 year old preschool room (way beyond tantrums) that would make your head spin. Nothing is done or can be done. Services are cut, parents are in denial and teachers hands are tied.

Carry this forward and what comes of it are troubled adolescents, teenagers and adults that can no longer function in this society as civil human beings. Give this group access to any sort of weapon and watch what happens.

Easy to argue black is white but the issues are very obvious.

Very sad but entirely expected until the denial stops ... pity the kids, teachers and families.

Agreed! Welcome back Grea......
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvvPIaYrSo

yes.

a lot more constructive than your comment apparently...

pot, meet kettle.

I don't listen to talk radio so I was unfamiliar w/ this Alex Jones. I didn't go to school with this one.

So if I understand your earlier comments in this thread you'd like go back to the 70's or earlier and see God back in schools and homes?

Here's a Wall Street Journal article that expresses my thoughts with better research notes: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036.html
 
Last edited:
Deadly silence...
Society is falling from within into decadence, just like the Roman Empire did in the past.
 
In the UK, we have a routinely unarmed Police force. Gun crime is also fortunately only a very niche issue and we have specialist units that deal with armed offences. The justification is below:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398

I've always been of the view that one gun in a potentially violent situation leads to a lower potential for being shot. Both sides having guns merely raises the stakes and in hazardous situations, simply increases the chance of being shot from panicking the criminal. This notion of 'defending oneself' is exactly the reason why knife crime in South London has become a problem. One teenager carries a knife, the others start carrying to 'defend' and then all of a sudden you have a spate of stabbings. The same is true of guns.

But in that case....the great majority of guns were illegal,and not posessed lawfully.This was also the case in all....yes all of these shootings.The guns were illegally posessed.

Before I was assigned to crime scene,I was assigned to the ballistics unit.we exanined and test fired all firearms that were vouchered by the NYPD, in
arrest,surrender,investigated and found circustances.Around that 3% of firearms that were used to commit a crime are legally possessed.All others are posessed illegally.

NY City has tough gun control laws,and is one of the only citys in the country,where to need a permit for a long gun.The only handgun carry permits that are issued are generally fot retired law enforcment,and only 200 or so to civilians,in a city of over 8 million people.

In my second year on the job I was shot in my vest ,buy a emotionally disturbed person,who wanted to commit suicide.My partner and I were trying to talk him down.He wouldn't open the door,so we were there for quite a while,when he suddenly fired 4 shots through the door.It was a heavy metal skinned,lined door and two of the shots hit me in the chest.I was wearing my bullet resistant vest,which stopped the rounds.This individual I believe was originally planning suicide by cop,but later changed his mind,and later took his own life by shooting himself in the head.He was one of the first recorded AIDS cases in NY.

How that relates to this is,I'm also and NRA and NY state firearms instructor.I have taught hundreds of cops and civilians,including Boy Scouts how to shoot.I'ts also about safety,common sense,and respect.I continue to teach to this day..

I can't tell you how many times I've said this.....owning a gun is a life style change,and if you can't or won't wrap your head around that,then you have no business even being anywhere near a firearm.I have on occasion called the NYPD license section and told them,NOT to issue some of my students a permit.I have taught staunch anti gunners about guns,safety,common sense possession and marksmanship.The great majority changed their minds and saw the other side of the coin.

As much as I believe in civilian ownership of firearms,just because you can do something,dosen't mean you should.Judgement , temperment,respect,and mental stability should be factored in as well as training.BEFORE legally posessing a firarm



Just as an aside,when I last visited London,as a retired NYPD,I was curious to know how the Metropolitan police felt about being armed and unarmed.In and around St James and Buckingham Palace,there were pleny of armed,yes armed PCs.I spock to a sergeant who was standing a post close to St James.I told him who I was,and said ,do you mind if I ask you a question.I said I notice your carrying a Glock 19,truthfully,don't you feel better with that on your hip?
He just smiled broadley ,and said..I feel the same way you do detective.The UK is one of a very few parts of the world that dosen't routinely arm it's police,except for the PSNI where all officers are armed.

There are lots of arguments to he heard.There will be extreme arguments on either side.Clearly we need to be more active in our childrens lives,and become more educated as teachers and parents.We also need to recognize the signs of mental illness when we see them,and take immeadiate and positive action.

Unfortunately,parenting in the US at least is the largest growing competitive sport in the country.The not me,my child is perfect, blinders on, parent numbers are growing.Parents seem to believe that schools,teachers,TV and the internet should be raising their children,in a time when parents and the family unit need to reinforce education with interaction,love an just plain common sense.As a retired boy scout leader,I can tell you as a nation,parents are failing their children.We used to joke the BSA (boy scouts of America),actually stood for Baby Sitters Are us.

Andy...I just need to ask what safety catch you're refering to since all modern quality firearms have actually,numerous built in automatic,as well as manually operated safeties.The Glock pistol as an example has a safe action system which consists of a trigger safety,a half cock disconector,and a drop safety,which are built in,tamperproof and work automaticly.



Steve B
 
Last edited:
I don't listen to talk radio so I was unfamiliar w/ this Alex Jones. I didn't go to school with this one.

So if I understand your earlier comments in this thread you'd like go back to the 70's or earlier and see God back in schools and homes?

Here's a Wall Street Journal article that expresses my thoughts with better research notes: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036.html

You mentioned God.

I said morality is decaying, the family construct is more messed up than ever, we have enabled selfishness and arrogance to go unchecked and tolerance of bad behavior is at an all time high. Meanwhile we are all trying to become better than everyone else and have our eyes glued to screens.

We can just continue to deny it and kick this down the road more. It's only getting worse.

What's wrong with trying to live a life like Jesus lived anyway? Christaphobia
 
What's wrong with trying to live a life like Jesus lived anyway? Christaphobia

Nothing at all, except one first has to believe Jesus existed to do so.
Religion and religious beliefs (I thought) were not supposed to enter the forum.

So I'll stop reading this thread now.
 
when I last visited London,as a retired NYPD,I was curious to know how the Metropolitan police felt about being armed and unarmed.In and around St James and Buckingham Palace,there were pleny of armed,yes armed PCs.I spock to a sergeant who was standing a post close to St James.I told him who I was,and said ,do you mind if I ask you a question.I said I notice your carrying a Glock 19,truthfully,don't you feel better with that on your hip?
He just smiled broadley ,and said..I feel the same way you do detective.

All due respect to the police and their armed response units, but as a civilian it makes me very uneasy to see armed police in UK streets. Rather than feel safer, my typical reaction is to think that something is wrong . . . something very bad has happened - otherwise armed officers wouldn't be there.

This was very much the case in the days that followed July 7th 2005. A day or two after the bombings I was passing through Leeds City (Railway) Station [which is about 200 miles away from central London where the attacks took place] and saw armed police patrolling the premises. They were armed with submachine guns as well as pistols and I suddenly felt anything but safe. The country was on a higher-than-usual level of security alert, sure, but having an armed police presence gave me little reassurance.

In the wake of the rioting and looting that took place in London and across the UK in August 2011 many called for police to be routinely armed or even to have troops deployed in the worst areas. I don't know about anyone else but I count myself as particularly fortunate to live in a time when Saracens aren't routinely rolling down some of the streets of this country.
 
I for one would like to see armed police anywhere you have a large group of people. These little cowards would not be able to unleash there terror as easily.
 
There are armed Police in the UK but, as Bad Tempered Clavier says, they are an unusual sight. In the capital, they are usually there as a response to a security alert or to protect a high-value individual such as the Queen or members of the government. Walking around the capital (and I live very close to it, I was in London today, in fact) I have never seen a beat officer wearing a firearm and I don't wish to. The last time I saw an armed officer in the UK was in Gatwick Airport - which obviously has a specific security requirement.

The armed Police in the UK are a very small subset (5%) of officers. Those 5% receive intensive training and are generally only called for in specific instances when life is in immediate danger. Unfortunately, even with this approach to armed Policing, there have been cases in the last few years of officers mistakenly killing civilians, just as there have been cases of civilians killing unarmed officers but these are incredibly rare.

Quite simply, guns are not a topic of everyday British culture. When somebody owns a gun, it is usually on the quiet. I know one civilian that owns a rifle (quite a few own shotguns and the licence is very different) and that is stored at a rifle club, which is practically the only way to own a rifle in the UK. The Section 5 licence - which is required to own anything in a 'military' calibre (e.g. 5.56, 7.62, .223 (same as 5.56 essentially), .308 (same as 7.62 essentially), .303 (old British standard), etc are incredibly stringent to the point that the vast majority of the population could not own a firearm of significant power. Handguns are outright banned. I, for instance, could not privately hold a rifle due to my medical record unless it was stored at a club and everything was logged - including the ammunition.

I find it hard to understand the American attitude towards firearms but I do know a bit about the US Constitution. Nowhere does it say that anybody has the right to own a gun. If they own a weapon, they are supposed to be members of a militia. I doubt that many people in the US that privately hold weapons are members of an organised militia, or have indeed actually studied the Constitutional Amendment. The Second Amendment is actually based on a British writ that says much the same, except with the caveat that any ownership of arms must adhere to other laws - no such caveat is applied in the US Constitution.

As a result, I find it very amusing when people speak of the 'right' to own a gun. The Constitution actually says no such thing! 'Arm' is not a synonymous term and the membership of a militia should be enforceable - but it's not enforced.

The first step in every social change is education and awareness. Of course anybody motivated enough to commit a crime will do so and this may involve a firearm - this is true in any country but in the US the ease of access to firearms is second-to-none in the Western World, with the exception of Switzerland for reasons Henri explained. Guns may not kill people but guns make it a Hell of a lot easier for an individual to commit mass murder should they be motivated. If the same individual had entered the school with a Katana or a Machete, I doubt the death toll would have been anything like as tragic as that which transpired. Trying to bury heads in the sand and deny that gun control is a problem is a deep disrespect to all of those killed in these tragic incidents, at home, work, or school.

From an outsider's perspective, the American attitude towards guns is absolutely crazy. Would I like to own a rifle for target shooting in a controlled environment? Sure. It's fun. Would I like to own a rifle at home for no reason other than my own soundness of mine against some ephemeral 'bad guys'? Hell no.
 
I can understand exactly how you feel.During the same time I was visiting the UK,I took the Chunnel over to Paris,and in their subways were two man armed canine patrols,with automatic assault rifles.I believe they were the National police,but their uniforms were very military in appearence.Now I'm an American,and a cop who's been around guns my whole life,and that made me give pause.This was in 2000,before the bombings of 9/11 ,and the ones in the UK.I've done warrant executions,and have been armed with a shotgun or M-4,but never on patrol.

It all changed after that.NYPD on the streets and airports with full body armor ,dogs and automatic weapons.....every day,24/7/365.

Even if you were to ban all guns......there are millions of them out there.Plenty of them are illegal guns owned by ,you guessed it,Joe criminal.There is more gun related gun crimes like robbery in NY City,because the bad guys who have the illegal guns,know that joe citizen isn't armed.Just ask them.I did,and thats the answer they will all give you.

They love it when things like this happen.It means theanti gun lobby will start shouting gun control again,and take more legaly owned guns away from Joe citizen.That just makes their job easier.It's amazing what you learn talking to prision inmates.

In a country like the US, more gun control just dosen't work,because it only affects the law abiding citizen,who does what he must legally,to posess a firearm.The bad guy or the psyco dosen't care about gun laws or permits or training.Gun control only makes their job a lot easier,because they know that when they confront you,that you won't be armed......but they will..........

Steve B
 
Last edited:
I read a fantastic article yesterday in the Telegraph about gun control in the US (not my normal paper, I have to say) but I forgot the save it and scan it in. I was going to put it up on this thread.

The British Police force were founded on the basis of them having a specifically non-military appearance. Hence the blue uniforms and the lack of a firearm. It's a very deep tradition.
 
Andy...I just need to ask what safety catch you're refering to since all modern quality firearms have actually,numerous built in automatic,as well as manually operated safeties.The Glock pistol as an example has a safe action system which consists of a trigger safety,a half cock disconector,and a drop safety,which are built in,tamperproof and work automaticly.



Steve B
Steve, let me start by saying how informative your post was :)

I also want to point out that, although I believe most firmly that firearm proliferation is a negative factor, I also understand the scale & complexity of the issues. For starters, even if it was possible to substantially reduce firearm ownership, how the hell would you implement it. Disarming all the legally entitled people leaving the majority of firearms in the hands of criminals isn't exactly a good idea.

My information may be out of date Steve, but I remember taking a return flight from JFK a few years ago, & reading a copy of the Herald Tribune. There was an article describing a debate (I can't remember which house, senate I think) where a senator argued against mandatory fitting of safety catches on the basis it was unconstitutional. I think the issue was the NRA were fighting against mandatory measures. manufacturers are free to fit such devices, as are customers free to choose firearms with safety catches fitted. Let's face it, who wouldn't, but the NRA were opposed to it being a legal requirement to have a safety catch. If I remember correctly, the proposed legislation only applied to new guns, with no requirement to retrofit. I've no idea how it all panned out.

Major tragedy & killing spree happenings aside, I think any process has to start with accepting there's a serious problem. For one nation to have such a hugely disparate firearms related mortality rate, whilst maintaining a similar population & society demographic as their global neighbors, there must be a set of factors that set that nation aside from all the others.

I also accept the feelings of needing to defend yourself. In such a context, I totally get that, but, on a small & personal scale, in the US, you effectively have a domestic arms race in progress. When has that ever been a good policy?

I also accept that most shootings are down to those who own firearms illegally, but is it not reasonable to assume that availability with such ease is part of that issue? The more firearms out there, the easier it is to get hold of them, & let's face it, the US is awash with guns - literally.

Not my country, so time for me to shut up.

Peace to all.
 
Even if you were to ban all guns......there are millions of them out there.Plenty of them are illegal guns owned by ,you guessed it,Joe criminal.

Agreed. Can't do much to stop the crooks.

But what if a mother was made to exercise far more stringent control over a ready made arsenal sitting in a cupboard just waiting for her idiot son to access so easily?
 
I think that Steve B sums it up.
You have to think like a criminal.
A criminal is a predator.
~A predator looks for the easy prey.~
That is the true nature of it.
 
Oh, he's most definitely just another "profit" mate. Whether he's the son of God or not, he's been more than profitable to quite a few organisations for a couple of thousand years now.

Best Freudian slip ever!! ;-)

Jules, we must have a telepathic link :)

Screw guns - more drums! There are more gun shops in the US than McDonalds ... imagine what the country would be like if there were more music shops instead?? Yes, I know - it's impossible to imagine :(

It would help to have a medical safety net too, so people with mental illness can afford to get help before everything goes to hell. Let's face it, the gun genie can't be put back in the bottle, which is a sad situation for US citizens who don't love lethal weaponry.
 
I don't wish to single out any particular nation because - as I alluded to earlier in this thread - firearm related deaths, be they homicide, suicide, or accidental, are a Global problem.

However I do find it curious when people cite "home defence" as reason for owning a firearm, whether they happen to be legally/morally entitled to own that weapon or not. I mean, if one happens to live in a part of the world where your home is likely to be invaded by a bear or something or you need something to stop predators attacking your livestock then fair enough. Otherwise we are talking about shooting and, by extension, potentially killing a person.

A lot of people make very bold statements about the ease with which they would happily shoot anyone who threatens their home/family/whatever but I wonder if it is always so easy. Unless that person happens to have experience of combat or at least a firefight then the likelihood of them freezing up when faced with such a confrontation is surely quite high; and there are precious few ways for civilians to train for combat. Shooting at stationary paper targets when you are at rest is one thing. Trying to fire upon a moving, living, human when you've just woken up at 3am and everyone in the house is screaming is another.
 
BTC all of this is true, however there are classes from several of the gun shops here that teach you to take the shot and not stand there shaking like a leaf. I live in a very quiet neighborhood where the houses are in the 135 to 150 K range and in the 25 years I have been here there has been one home invasion of a senior lady. She was targeted by the robber because of her age and put up little fight. I'm sure a gun would not have helped her, but if the invader has been threatened by someone else a little more adept, he would have turned and run. No one wants to shoot anyone but if its me or the bad guy, the bad guy is going to lose.
 
Back
Top