There has been lots of discussion about the significance of the Sandy Hook massacre on gun control in America. Some have claimed the incident is being used for political gain others have expressed it as a tragedy requiring law changes. This ignores the real issue. The important question is would the shooting have ocurred if the law had made semi automatic weapons illegal and if so would it have been as devastating?
To me the obvious answer is no, a shy autistic teenager with no friends is unlikely to have sufficient underworld connections to aquire semi automatic weapons and an attempt to do so has a good chance of getting him arrested instead.
If semi-automatics were illegal, and if there were no grandfather possession, and if the government were able to get the majority of semi-automatics turned in/seized, then it might have made it so Sandy Hood wouldn't have happened or wouldn't have been so bad.
Or, Lanza might have gone online and bought one through the black market... it's not really that hard and you don't need any connections.
But, if we did get rid of most semi-automatic weapons, there would not only be an entire class of criminals that had them(with citizens much less-well armed than themselves), but a new black market which would give wealth and power to even more bad people.
Prohibition gave wealth and power to the mafia families. The war on drugs is giving wealth and power to cartels and drug lords. Illegal guns would give wealth and power to those criminals, and others.
So maybe we could have had a less-horrible Sandy Hook, but we would also have to account for the increases in crime that would come with it.
Increases in crime, I might add, that will almost certainly result in additional deaths if not mass killings like Sandy Hook.
While Sandy Hook tugs at our heartstrings as little else does, it needs to be recognized that such incidents are but a very small portion of the overall homicide rate in the US. It is very easy to get really worked up over such an insane tragedy (I know I did, for days, and still think of it every time I pick my grandchildren up from their school) it doesn't matter to the dead whether their life was taken in a mass killing at their school or in an alley from being stabbed in a mugging.
We desperately need to address the causes of Sandy Hook and the huge homicide rate in the US, not try to put a bandaid on by denying freedoms and rights to law abiding citizens while allowing and even encouraging whatever is wrong in our country to continue to fester and grow.
I can load my S&W 686 as fast with a speed loader as I can my Beretta with a magazine.
I think a lot of people commenting or passing judgement have never touched a gun. They pass judgement out of fear. They wish the Nanny State to protect them. Everything the govt. does "For our own good" ends up not being good at all.Just take one look at Amerika right now!
Sandy Hook DA cites 'potential suspects,' fears witness safety
Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/3 … z2KUmXu5H3
Josak as you know I admire you but not on this issue. Too much dodging around saying which kind of gun, All guns must go except for those used by the people employed to use them I mean the police. Come on be BRAVE and start a no gun movement.
I am curious how you think you will accomplish the task of insuring there are no privately owned weapons.
Whoever said life is easy you all have a mountain to climb.
I can see both sides of the gun control debates. To me , the biggest problem is Mental Health issues. There really is not much parents, or families can do with a mentally ill person. There are not very many choices offered to them. And in light of some of the cases I have studied, even if they are seeing a Psychiatrist, even they don't see how big the problem is - or, if they do, the system just says, "Well, there's nothing we can do until a crime is committed."
If a deranged person really wanted to kill a lot of people, most of them seem to be intelligent enough to make home made bombs, if they wanted to. That could potentially kill even more people than a gun. Imagine how little time it would take to walk down a hallway, throwing a bomb into each classroom or each movie theater.
Or, they could use an SUV, or even just a plain old car, and kill lots of people in crowded crosswalks, or sidewalks, sitting outside at Bistro's.
In my opinion, finding a way to deal with homicidal people, is the biggest issue. I just hope we all keep talking about it, until a good solution is put into place. Let's don't wait for it to happen over and over again.
Just as easy as blaming an inanimate object?
Oh I see ! You mean all the profiteers who are giggling at their success as you all kill each other.
You all? I no longer own any guns .I do believe we are sacrificing to many freedoms in the name of "Being Safe" If someone is hell bent on harming others they will find a way, with or without firearms.
Not nearly as easy as blaming an inanimate tool for the carnage that people are causing.
KT is right - somehow we are becoming a nation of crazed murderers without regard to life and removing one tool isn't going to slow that trend one iota.
I am talking about the future, a future where kids-innocent kids aren't shot,a future where innocent kids in other lands aren't shot _DRONES. All opinions are simple in the beginning
Yes, opinions are simple in the beginning and usually based on nothing more that a desire that something be true.
Before taking away freedoms and rights, though, don't you think you should investigate whether your opinion is actually true or not? Whether it has a connection to reality, something beyond your personal opinion?
I, for instance, am of the opinion that violence laden TV and movie shows are a prime factor in killings such as this; would you support nothing but G rated shows and video games because I hold that opinion?
I repeat; what evidence can you show that removing guns from society will result in a lowered homicide rate? When and where have strong gun control laws had that result?
If an apple is bad then dump it ! No time for this an that just get on with dumping guns . Too much waffle my friend.
Perhaps it is just waffle. And perhaps it is a complete willingness to control others without having the faintest idea of what can be expected from from that control.
Third time; you have claimed that gun controls will decrease the homicide rate. What and where is the evidence for that opinion, or is it simply based on a desire to control other people and how they live?
Everyone has an opinion on most things, the difference is that some are reasoned and some are not. Some are based on factual data, some are not. Some are based on experience and some are not. The trick, of course, is to determine which is which; I do that by asking for the reasoning and evidence being used to produce an opinion. So far you have not produced that; your opinion is currently judged worthless as a result.
Although screaming loudly and jumping up and down is fairly effective at convincing some people your opinion is the right one, there are still quite a few that want a little more before forming their own opinion. Help me out here; give me some actual facts or experience to look at rather than just accept your word that it is true.
I am not screaming loudly and never did I say that life and efforts are guaranteed. The most I said was that it would be good to start a no gun movement. It would be positive. I think you are getting carried away in saying I am into control,I am not. . People are themselves,in your country, seeing the sense of sacking guns and living a proud life again .
We have bigger problems than gun control right now.
Fourth request; you are claiming that the results of a no gun effort would be positive, by which I assume you mean it will result in fewer deaths. What and where is the evidence for that claim?
By now you have to understand that I'm not particularly interested in your opinion. I am interested in the reasoning and evidence behind that opinion; given that I will draw my own conclusions, based on that evidence, what is it? What are you using to draw the conclusion that gun controls will limit murders?
Off the topic a little, but I would respond to living a proud life again - I do not consider it particularly a proud life when govt. is required to act as a parent to citizens, dictating everything they can or can't do. Accepting that society does need rules, those rules should be limited wherever possible as citizens are adults, not small children needing a nanny to take care of them.
I get it now ! You don't have to say any more ! Why don't you turn it on it's head and admit that the the ones in control who are ruled by the gun lobby are also penalizing the public and you don't seem to be sure just where you stand. Are you being dictated to ? Are you worried about losing your manliness ie. your gun ? As your prisons are bursting open one wonders where the thousands who will be arrested for not toeing the line and handing in their guns when new laws come in , will be sent to. You need change now and I am sorry but it is your problem. If you haven't bothered to study the stats. of other lands well nothing more to say
Ah, but I did study the stats (primarily from the UN) of other lands, and in considerable detail. They are what I base my opinion on that removing guns won't reduce the homicide rate. It was a shock, analyzing data that forced a conclusion so far removed from what I expected, but it is what it is and I will accept it whether it agrees with "common sense" or not.
I even took the time to compile the results of my study, correlate them and produce a conclusion that can be seen on the carousel in my profile along with the raw data. In other words, I did what you have steadfastly refused to do; actually make an effort to come to a reasoned conclusion based on whatever evidence I could find rather than use a "gut feeling" or "common sense" to produce an opinion that has no connection to reality. I even made the data, the reasoning used and the conclusion drawn public and available to anyone that might be interested.
You've made it abundantly clear that you have no intention of producing any actual data, and that leaves me pretty cold as far as accepting that your opinion has any connection to reality.
When you degenerate to the point of insinuating that I equate my manliness to a gun, well, I'm not much interested any more. You have nothing of value to offer, just opinions you refuse to explain and insults.
Have a good day, Jandee - perhaps we'll meet again somewhere else when you can offer useful information rather than just biased opinion.
Where is your rage and frustration coming from ? Have I insulted you ? Was that before I called all people carrying guns cowards ? If I have I am sorry I was just writing in sympathy for the dead children.
In Japan guns are illegal and there are no gun deaths. sorry have to drive off now ,bye from jandee
America doesn't have a gun problem. America has a systemic problem of ignoring the needy to the point where it significantly contributes to violence in general. We've gutted mental health services. We've gutted social programs. We haven't stigmatized the needy, but we have stigmatized the use of social services to the point where we believe anybody who uses any form of social service is just a lazy mooch.
A lot of violence, including gang violence, happens because people feel desperate. People join gangs to belong and to feel that someone cares about them, because their families don't, their teachers don't, and society doesn't. A lot of what they do, including engaging in violence, is considered to them to be a matter of survival.
The mentally ill don't get the help they need for two reasons; one, it's not affordable or especially accessible and two, there's a stigma associated with mental illness that makes people fear seeking treatment will "out" them as an unstable person.
Some mass killings occur because of desperate people seeking to eliminate what they see as the source of all their problems.
No, we do not have a gun problem here. We have a problem that goes far deeper and is far more painful to admit to, which is why we seek to single out the mentally ill, or push for stronger gun control. Want to control gun violence? Work towards ending poverty, better education (a la FINLAND), a stronger social welfare system (yes I said it), and ending the stigmas against assistance.
Much of what you say I am in almost total agreement with, with the exception of a stronger welfare system. Assuming that you mean giving more charity, I don't think that's the answer.
Forever simply giving more and more results in an ever increasing dependency on the largess of others and that's counter productive. We need, instead, to create a vibrant economy with jobs available that pay a living wage and where upwards mobility to a reasonable level is possible for anyone willing to work at it.
There will always be a true need for charity for those unable to provide for themselves but we have already gone considerably beyond that with generations of people making a living out of welfare. We don't need to add to that; instead we need to insist that people that can actually earn there living and take pride in the fact that they can do so. That, given the reality of people, probably requires a measure of stigma attached to welfare but is likely a necessary evil.
Actual mechanisms of such a thing is not really relevant in this thread, though; what counts is getting people out of poverty and in that you are absolutely right. Poverty is one of the things that drives violence and eliminating it in the right way should help the violence problem immensely.
by Stacie L 7 years ago
Sandy Hook truthers: Conspiracy theorists out in full forceSandy Hook truthers have been out in full force over the past couple of weeks. Ever since a professor came forward and made claims about the media covering up what really happened on that tragic day in Newtown, Conn., groups of people have...
by H C Palting 8 years ago
Is tracking down illegal gun owners more important to you than knowing where legal gun owners are?How would you feel if your name and address were published online because you own a gun? While many gun owners' info ends up on lists that can be viewed by the public, do you disagree with making this...
by MR Black 8 years ago
Don't you think it's abot time America take a serious look at gun control?With the regular stories of young men shooting and killing peope, even in high school our kids are not safe. To keep the gun industry alive many claims gun don't kill people, people do. Well if there was no guns who could...
by Stclairjack 8 years ago
1) i have no problem banning the civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons (already illegal, has been for years, so its like me saying have no qualms with the sun coming up in the morning)2) i have NO problem banning the import, manufacture, or sale of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds,...
by Marcy Goodfleisch 3 years ago
Do you believe there should be tighter gun control laws?Should there be laws against selling or owning some types of guns? What do you think?
by Gary Anderson 7 years ago
Globalism or militant, mulitracial Zionism is the most powerful political movement in the world today. It is not a race, nor is it a religion. It is a POLITICAL MOVEMENT according to a recent ruling by a British Court, which has said that Zionism is not the same as Abrahamic Judaism and is subject...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|