NRA's media event today: your thoughts?

[Disclaimer]

Harvard Injury Control Research Center

Homicide

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

[buildit]

Not a school but it translates well into how the ability to defend ones self should be universal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis&list=LLPsHBm3lhImzkXHVRr2LjLw

[swingset]

Snipped endless babbling about why guns are icky and armed guards don't work.

So what's your plan? Gun bans?

I would be the first to agree armed guards, teachers or cops aren't a panacea, just as all the guns and controls on inmates can't completely cure the violence and contraband in a prison....but it sure beats just tearing the fence down and letting them roam.

What's your plan?

[Pokey]

Not a school but it translates well into how the ability to defend ones self should be universal.

I already posted that excellent example of reality.....you copy cat!

[cOoTeR]

They (I assume you mean the people in need of mental health that commit these offenses) choose the most convienient crowded public areas. Why drive 50 miles to the nearest military base when the school or movie theater is 5miles away?

I'm no psychologist or have the background on this, but I'd surmise an element of the paranoia is attacking the people they perceive as "public", the common man. There is an element of terrorism to it. Engaging military people is combat. Terrorism is doing it to the least suspecting and unengaged.

Well, if that's the psychological warfare you want to play -- I don't necessarily agree that it makes a difference to someone with mental health issues, deterrents are only valid for sane and logical people -- but to your point, why not let kids defend themselves in school? You really want a deterrent, let criminals think that even those outside positions of authority in schools can carry. If a child can demonstrate competency with a weapon, that would be a great bullying deterrent as well.

You're the one that said ALL teacher didn't have to be armed... so if not all of them are, it's pretty easy to guess which ones aren't. Jerry, the 6'5" muscular gym teacher, or Ethel, the 66 yr old librarian? I know which one I'd have the upper hand in the reflex and strength department if they ever got close enough -- even if Ethel was packing.

That's why cops never get attacked and killed in the line of duty, right? You're proving your own point... we're not dealing with people "in their right mind".

I haven't formulated a reasonable solution yet. It takes time to do research on these things and make compromises -- that's why I don't jump on the internet right away and proclaim "Here is the solution to this problem". I'm humble enough to know that I don't have a solution nor am I experienced or educated enough to come up with one at the moment.

We can have a discussion about it and offer options and opinions, but to proclaim "I'm right and all others that disagree are koolaid drinking pussy lib-douches" really doesn't help come to a solution, nor does it paint said proclaimer as the most intelligent being. I'm not saying YOU are proclaiming that, but there are a lot of people that take that stance. It's simple-minded and the reason things don't get solved in this country.

So you think they attack a place because its close? Then why not gas stations or banks as a common place for suicidal gun attacks? There are more of those than schools so people are closer to these than schools in general.

When it comes down to it all we have in these schools are legal deterrents to protect these kids. Obviously this doesn't suffice in todays society. You need protection on top of it. I'd be all for every kid carrying a gun. I carried a knife with me all the way through high school as did most people in my school. Also during gun week for deer most of us had a shotgun and boxes of slugs in our cars and trucks. never had a stabbing or shooting at my school because we all used these items as tools like they are. Give the kid a psych test and competency along with legal training why not other then as you mentioned who would fund this?

So you can tell by people if they are carrying a firearm? You've got talent and could probably get rich off of that skill if you really had it.

Most cops aren't just attacked when killed in the line of duty normally they are responding to something else and surprised by the weapon.

The current plans in schools is call the cops to bring a gun to the school when a shooting happens and hope the shooter doesn't move room to room. Why not already have a trained gunman waiting in a few of those rooms? When do these people give up in these shootings? It is consistently when more people with guns are near and about to get near them.

That's right you have no solution all your doing is saying everyone's solution is wrong just to be the troll you are.

[cOoTeR]

Harvard Injury Control Research Center

Homicide

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

Did you ever think there are more guns there because there is more crime in those areas already?

Let's look at the crime rates in Chicago and the homicides. Pretty high regardless of the strict gun laws. L.A. same thing.

I carry a gun to level the playing field because badguys will always have them.

[Disclaimer]

Research accounts for that... Hence why I defer to those that did the statistical analyses.

Just because I can cite sources and case studies that prove things contrary to your opinion does not make me a troll... It makes your arguments weak. This is also why I don't claim to have a solution, because I'm not an expert and all the armchair politicians on here aren't either.

I don't care about how much of a badass or Ricky Rambo someone thinks they are with their CCW or arsenal of home weapons... It's a different ball game when they're actually in the crisis situation and have to decide to pull the trigger or not, if they're not from a military or police background.

[Pokey]

Research accounts for that... Hence why I defer to those that did the statistical analyses.

Just because I can cite sources and case studies that prove things contrary to your opinion does not make me a troll... It makes your arguments weak. This is also why I don't claim to have a solution, because I'm not an expert and all the armchair politicians on here aren't either.

I don't care about how much of a badass or Ricky Rambo someone thinks they are with their CCW or arsenal of home weapons... It's a different ball game when they're actually in the crisis situation and have to decide to pull the trigger or not, if they're not from a military or police background.

Yet many military and police haven't fired a single round at an enemy or criminal, so what is the point you are attempting to make? And can you believe that many of us civilian folks are allot better marksman or more level headed than military and law enforcement? And you are so far off base about Ricky Rambo and the badass comment, you are completely ignorant and simple minded to actually think that CHL folks have this mentality. So what would you do if actually in a crisis situation, shit your pants then die or die then shit your pants? You and Magley need to get a room, and give eachother some serious bleeding Liberal hand-love. And you have no solution to the problems, because you don't agree with what some of the actual and viable solutions are. Keep your bullshit comments and logic coming though, probably very safe to say that 3/4 of the site members here don't or won't buy into it. So there is a stat for ya!!!

[chevysoldier]

They (I assume you mean the people in need of mental health that commit these offenses) choose the most convienient crowded public areas. Why drive 50 miles to the nearest military base when the school or movie theater is 5miles away?

The Colorado theater was not the closest one to the shooter but it was the closest no gun zone.

I'm no psychologist or have the background on this, but I'd surmise an element of the paranoia is attacking the people they perceive as "public", the common man. There is an element of terrorism to it. Engaging military people is combat. Terrorism is doing it to the least suspecting and unengaged.

They attack those that cannot fight back, school kids, no gun zones...not gun shows/stores or police stations

Well, if that's the psychological warfare you want to play -- I don't necessarily agree that it makes a difference to someone with mental health issues, deterrents are only valid for sane and logical people -- but to your point, why not let kids defend themselves in school? You really want a deterrent, let criminals think that even those outside positions of authority in schools can carry. If a child can demonstrate competency with a weapon, that would be a great bullying deterrent as well.

Sure these massacre shooters were insane on some level, but illogical?They planned the shootings to some degree i.e., entrance/exit,getting firearms inside, armor, where to stand or what rooms to take, how to block exits, etc. In order for deterrents to not work at least in part, the person would have to be so bat shit crazy that a fully armed military standing at the front doors wouldn't faze him. Again, a store filled with a bunch of gun enthusiasts doesn't attract many day time robbers, they try it at night. That's a pretty good deterrent. Even though they are insane, they still know a good guy with a gun is a threat to their "mission" You know your arming kids comment is irrational and completely ridiculous.

You're the one that said ALL teacher didn't have to be armed... so if not all of them are, it's pretty easy to guess which ones aren't. Jerry, the 6'5" muscular gym teacher, or Ethel, the 66 yr old librarian? I know which one I'd have the upper hand in the reflex and strength department if they ever got close enough -- even if Ethel was packing.

So now you're profiling. My 87 year old grandma sleeps with a pistol under her bed. There was that grandma in town for the horse races that shot an invader. My uncle was 6'6'' and a fricking brick wall, he hated guns.

That's why cops never get attacked and killed in the line of duty, right? You're proving your own point... we're not dealing with people "in their right mind".

Cops get killed because they are a threat to someone that wants to partake in some crime. The cops stands between them and freedom. The cop is there to hold them accountable for their illegal actions and they probably don't like that idea. A person hell bent on killing people isn't going to go to a police department, they know they don't stand much of a chance.

I haven't formulated a reasonable solution yet. It takes time to do research on these things and make compromises -- that's why I don't jump on the internet right away and proclaim "Here is the solution to this problem". I'm humble enough to know that I don't have a solution nor am I experienced or educated enough to come up with one at the moment.

We can have a discussion about it and offer options and opinions, but to proclaim "I'm right and all others that disagree are koolaid drinking pussy lib-douches" really doesn't help come to a solution, nor does it paint said proclaimer as the most intelligent being. I'm not saying YOU are proclaiming that, but there are a lot of people that take that stance. It's simple-minded and the reason things don't get solved in this country.

Harvard Injury Control Research Center

Homicide

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

And HArvard is left so I'm sure their "studies" are tweaked to reflect what they want. "In **% of crimes with guns, someone is killed." They don't mention if it was justified self defense, they just lump it all together. I've seen it time and time again.

http://rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm

Kennesaw Historical Society president Robert Jones said following the law's passage, the crime rate dropped 89 percent in the city, compared to the modest 10 percent drop statewide.

"The crime rate wasn't that high to start with. It was 11 burglaries per 1,000 residents in 1981," he said.

According to the Kennesaw Police Department, the city's most recent crime statistics show 243 property crimes per 100,000 residents in 1998, or .243 per 1,000.

The city's crime rate continues to be far below other metro Atlanta city's with similar populations, like Decatur. In 1998, Decatur recorded 4,049 property crimes per 100,000 residents.

I think if a teacher is willing to carry, they should be allowed. They would need to qualify and obtain a CHL, take quality firearms training, crisis classes, run drills in their schools, and work with the local PD to develop plans and facial recognition or another way to ID good guys. They should also work with the teachers who don't want to carry so they can be included in the plans. The teachers don't need to carry a big .45. A pocket carried .380/38 would be fine. CHL records are only to be seen by the principle or other high officials, kept off school property. Local PD maybe? Strict regulations such as no faculty speaks of who carries or doesn't. While on school grounds, the gun doesn't leave the holstered area. If it needs to, it is done in a secure location like the principal's office with a locked door and goes into a safe. The school needs to practice good drills, not the "oh here is another fire drill, let's take our time getting outside" Locking the doors and the students exiting out the windows, get the hell out! Don't sit waiting for help to arrive. We have created a society that has been brought up to be a victim. We need to get rid of the "it can't happen to me" mentality.

Guns are not the problem. Society being trained to think guns are inherently evil, that it is better to be a victim, that someone who has personal bodyguards with semi-auto rifles can say you don't need one of those, the media tilting the stats and creating fear there that doesn't exist, parents that don't discipline or hold their children accountable, all the mental institutions being closed and those people released.... The world isn't roses and cotton candy. There are evil people in the world and they will harm you if given the chance. Elbows or a polite "please" won't make them think twice about taking your life if they feel the need or desire.

I'm tired and starting to lose my train of thought.... just my 1.5 cents

[2talltim]

Guns are not the problem. Society being trained to think guns are inherently evil, that it is better to be a victim, that someone who has personal bodyguards with semi-auto rifles can say you don't need one of those, the media tilting the stats and creating fear there that doesn't exist, parents that don't discipline or hold their children accountable, all the mental institutions being closed and those people released.... The world isn't roses and cotton candy. There are evil people in the world and they will harm you if given the chance. Elbows or a polite "please" won't make them think twice about taking your life if they feel the need or desire.

just found my new sig line quote, i could not said it any better myself, thanks cheby:bow::bow:

[cOoTeR]

Research accounts for that... Hence why I defer to those that did the statistical analyses.

Just because I can cite sources and case studies that prove things contrary to your opinion does not make me a troll... It makes your arguments weak. This is also why I don't claim to have a solution, because I'm not an expert and all the armchair politicians on here aren't either.

I don't care about how much of a badass or Ricky Rambo someone thinks they are with their CCW or arsenal of home weapons... It's a different ball game when they're actually in the crisis situation and have to decide to pull the trigger or not, if they're not from a military or police background.

Here's some stats for you.

http://www.citizensreportuk.org/reports/murders-fatal-violence-uk.html

Murder rates per year in the UK 11.5 per 1,000,000.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/08/20/mexico-murders-hit-271-in-2011/

In Mexico 27,199 in 2011 or 24 per 100,000.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

In America 16,799 in 2011 or 5.5 per 100,000.

Guns are not legal in the UK or Mexico yet their murder rates are higher than in the US? So how does restricting guns help?

[cOoTeR]

Research accounts for that... Hence why I defer to those that did the statistical analyses.

Just because I can cite sources and case studies that prove things contrary to your opinion does not make me a troll... It makes your arguments weak. This is also why I don't claim to have a solution, because I'm not an expert and all the armchair politicians on here aren't either.

I don't care about how much of a badass or Ricky Rambo someone thinks they are with their CCW or arsenal of home weapons... It's a different ball game when they're actually in the crisis situation and have to decide to pull the trigger or not, if they're not from a military or police background.

http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/ohio/columbus.html#.UNWaO-bCteY

Columbus violent crime rates are 74.71% higher than the national average.

But

http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/illinois/chicago.html#.UNWatubCteY

Chicagos violent crime rates are 148.31% higher than the national average even though Chicago has more strict gun laws.

See I can pull stats also I just feel its a waste of time because you will just ignore them.

[buildit]

I already posted that excellent example of reality.....you copy cat!

It was such a good post it was worth repeating. Hell I drug it all over the web.

[jagr]

So, you're NOT in favor of reducing gun violence and crime? Got it.

You don't really believe any legislation is going to reduce gun violence and crime do you?

Sorry for being late to the party. I was digging out a box of teflon dipped Black Talons.

[ScubaCinci]

Here's some stats for you.

http://www.citizensreportuk.org/reports/murders-fatal-violence-uk.html

Murder rates per year in the UK 11.5 per 1,000,000.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/08/20/mexico-murders-hit-271-in-2011/

In Mexico 27,199 in 2011 or 24 per 100,000.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

In America 16,799 in 2011 or 5.5 per 100,000.

Guns are not legal in the UK or Mexico yet their murder rates are higher than in the US? So how does restricting guns help?

Uhm...not arguing or anything (I didn't check the links on my phone) but two of your statistics are per 100,000 and one is per 1,000,000. Typo?

[cOoTeR]

Uhm...not arguing or anything (I didn't check the links on my phone) but two of your statistics are per 100,000 and one is per 1,000,000. Typo?

That's the way its listed, per million in the UK and the others as 100,000.

[ScubaCinci]

OK, but then the UK is significantly lower than the US, not higher.

Again, not arguing because I totally agree with the overall point you are trying to make but this comparison statistic doesn't work for the US/UK. Of course, they are a smaller population and have less opportunity but it doesn't change the ratio.

[fizzer]

OK, but then the UK is significantly lower than the US, not higher.

Again, not arguing because I totally agree with the overall point you are trying to make but this comparison statistic doesn't work for the US/UK. Of course, they are a smaller population and have less opportunity but it doesn't change the ratio.

This, the equivalent stat would be 1.15 per 100,000, which ruins your argument.

[fizzer]

Dude... where do you find the Talons? I thought they were re-designated as "Rangers"? Not that it matters.. I just needs them.

I would also enjoy a line on some "Rangers"

[Disclaimer]

This, the equivalent stat would be 1.15 per 100,000, which ruins your argument.

Stats are bad mmmkay.

Harvard -- totally leftwing and biased, nothing good or academic comes from there, but please continue to quote sites like "Rense.com" -- totally credible Chevy.

And then when Cooter did post some credible numbers, the UK was better, which didn't help bolster that argument.

Speaking of profiling, it's funny you lump Mags and I together, since everyone is familiar with my firearm background. But hey, you guys keep ignoring the cold hard numbers in favor of your fantasy hero-scenarios and telling everyone how right you are and how wrong everyone else is that would dare question how simply obvious the solution of "more guns" solves this problem.

[cOoTeR]

This, the equivalent stat would be 1.15 per 100,000, which ruins your argument.

Yeah I was half asleep running on 4 hours of sleep last night. But the Mexican stat is still there.

[Pokey]

Stats are bad mmmkay.

Harvard -- totally leftwing and biased, nothing good or academic comes from there, but please continue to quote sites like "Rense.com" -- totally credible Chevy.

And then when Cooter did post some credible numbers, the UK was better, which didn't help bolster that argument.

Speaking of profiling, it's funny you lump Mags and I together, since everyone is familiar with my firearm background. But hey, you guys keep ignoring the cold hard numbers in favor of your fantasy hero-scenarios and telling everyone how right you are and how wrong everyone else is that would dare question how simply obvious the solution of "more guns" solves this problem.

I never recall saying that "more guns" solves the problems, more like keep things how they are and address the real issues. And guns are not the real issue, anybody that is honest with themselves knows that. MOB LEGISLATION AND MOB RULES are about to go down.

[buildit]

Why wait for the government to get it's head out of its a$$?

Buckeye Firearms Association (BFA) announced they have launched a pilot program to provide firearm training to teachers free of charge.

The announcement was made at a Town Hall Meeting at Ohio State University Thursday evening where participants debated the gun control issue in light of the recent mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

Ken Hanson, BFA's Legal Chair, made the announcement, saying, "Teachers and school board members have been asking us for years about training to prepare for an incident like Sandy Hook. So our educational Foundation will sponsor an Armed Teacher Pilot Program for a comprehensive 3-day training class at Tactical Defense Institute in West Union, Ohio. Based on the response to this pilot program, we will roll out classes to other training facilities."

The program will begin by accepting 24 teachers. All expenses, including class tuition, ammunition, and lodging (which are expected to total approximately $1,000 per teacher), will be paid by Buckeye Firearms Foundation and outside donations. Officials will be invited to attend the class at no cost to help develop appropriate training guidelines.

"The long-term goal is to develop a standard Armed Teacher curriculum and make the training available to any teacher or school official," said Hanson. "To begin, we will use funds from our educational foundation and solicit donations from corporations to pay for the pilot program. Going forward, we will seek funding from a variety of sources to expand the program."

BFA's educational foundation is finalizing details of the Armed Teacher Pilot Program and will provide further details as the program takes shape.

[Disclaimer]

Mental-Health Records Missing From Gun-Dealer Database

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324731304578191312121328632.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

The checks are only as good as the database you're checking.

[rsvRidr]

I wonder how much the ACLU will fight it now

http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2012/12/17/connecticut-mental-health-bill-defeated-months-before-deadly-school-shooting/