Mass shooting at primary school leaves 20 children dead, rocks quiet Conn. community

Guns are used because they are easily available. If we had only swords or sticks you would not see one tenth of the fatalities that are taking place each year. Guns are used against other human beings by the paranoid & delusional who take out their anger & resentment on others. If guns were not so widely available then the fatalities (the homicides & suicides) in the U.S. would be minuscule compared to what is now taking place.

You are totally off point .NO one cares you have a gun We all do care that this guy did. GET it ?

This isn’t about YOU or the difference between a clip or a magazine. NO ONE cares about your gun ownership .The world doesn’t revolve around you, your gun, Moses ,or the NRA.

the school in connecticut today would have loved to have just one….

Kevin, 22 people were INJURED in the knife attack. 26 people DIED in the shooting. Which do you think is better?

it was said before and today it is more true than ever…Wayne LaPierre said it about Clinton……”This President needs a certain amount of gun murders to move the gun control issue forward”…what kind of person politicalizes this incident on the very day it happens…President Obama does….

The China incident was horrific to be sure, and the kids will carry the scars and trauma with them for years if not for their lifetimes. I haven’t read what the death toll was – was there one?
As for us, we are a country awash in firearms, one that is perfectly willing to rationalize away the obvious about these outbursts till the cows come home before trying tackling the problem, which is as much a part of our popular culture as anything else.

That is a very weak retort.

we are gunna argue semantics here?

Detachable box magazine are a fairly new piece of kit in the firearm world but magazine’s aren’t. The term “magazine” originates with naval and land artillery. Magazines were enclosed or encased shelters, rooms, boxes, decks, etc. that contained and protected powder for the cannon.

The term magazine was first used with the early volcanic lever action and later henry/winchester rifles to describe the protected and enclosed internal (under barrel) ammunition feed mechanism.

The magazine of the weapon up until about 1930 was an intergal mechanical part of the weapon, until the arrival of guns like the thompson submachinegun, BAR, mp40, 1911, etc etc when the magazine become an external MECHANICAL component of the weapon.

Rifles such as the Garand with its en-bloc clip and mosin nagant, carcano, mauser, enfield, etc which can be loaded with a NON-MECHANICAL clip, have an internal magazine to accommodate their repeating fire ability. The key differences are CLIPS > non-mechanical device to assist loading but not 100% required for repeating fire

Magazines > internal or external 100% required for repeating fire.

A edjamacation for u.

exactly. Switzerland arms all of its citizens with semi-automatic rifles and teaches them how to use them. Gun violence is practically zilch in Switzerland.

All of its citizens? All Swiss males between 20 and 32 who are physically sound are required to serve in the national militia, which takes the place of a standing army. Training is regularly held, and men are in the militia at one level of other for life. Part of the duty includes being responsible for an assigned AR 15 and 24 rounds of ammunition. When their “active service is finished, they become national guardsmen and exchange the assault rifle for a bolt action model. So, yes, most Swiss men and many women possess weapons as part of national service, which is the very idea behind the Second Amendment,

One thing is certain: one doesn’t just walk into a gun shop in Davos, submit to a background check, and, after a while, take the weapon home – no tests, no competency exam – nothing. We can’t get a driving license without passing a competency test of sorts (not that it does much good for some), but to exercise our iconic Second Amendment rights (attached to a clause dealing with regulated militias)we need know next to nothing at all.

In consideration of the Swiss in this,the comparison is “apples and oranges.” It might be noted that for many historical reasons, the Swiss do not engage in wars abroad or at home. Can anyone even begin to imagine us, with our global appetites doing the same? Considering our historical penchant and ,yes, celebration in settling our differences with gun violence, I don’t know how much good it would do to look to them for a model in this matter.
Besides, there must be quirk or two in the weapons policy; apparently there is talk of cutting down on the possession end.

the 2nd Amendment is not just to protect ourselves from an intruder, it is also to protect ouselves from an out of control Gov, IE Syria, hitler, 1700s it was the british army so try that one again.

I’m pro gun and here’s my solution….recognize mental illness for what it is, and if need be separate those who pose a risk from society. Understand the fact that people who commit violent crime are not people who have a momentary lapse in rational thought, or made a mistake. Admit they are actually crazy and need to be separated from the population and in no way can or should be rehabilitated. Bring back institutionalized mental institutes and the death penalty, and get the wackos off the street.

Tell me what is “organized” about the so-called “militia” of millions of civilians who can buy whatever guns they want, with no qualifications, no training, no registration.

The only organized thing about it is the money flooding into the pockets of weapons manufacturers.

I trust our duly elected government FAR more than a rabble of paranoid gun owners.

If you think certain government officials are corrupt, vote them out. If you’re planning an armed insurrection, be advised that the word for that is treason, and it’s a felony.

The purpose of the NRA is to serve as a front for the weapons manufacturers, whose only concern is making money. Every NRA member has those children’s blood on their hands.

The point is not “the same amount of carnage in the same amount of time”. The point is taking away my rights to arm myself will not prevent someone gone ‘over the edge’ from perpetrating such carnage. I’m a fairly law abiding person, but, should I chose to do so, there are many, many ways I could think of to do so without a gun or a knife.

I’m not about to give up any rights for any reason. How does the saying go, “Those that would give up liberty for security will have neither, and deserve neither”? Something like that.

You somehow think that my right to own a gun, to protect myself from criminals, like this madman, from those who would impose a totalitarian government, infringes upon a child’s right to life. Like so many who think with the seat of the emotion rather than the brain, you make huge leaps of illogic. This man would have killed regardless of the weapon. He was bent on killing. Maybe he would have built a bomb, like Timothy McVeigh. Maybe he would have walked into that school room with a machete, and started hacking up kids, like so often happens in many third world countries, i.e. Uganda, Rhodesia, etc.

The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is founded in the Bill of Rights, and is anchored by the Second Amendment. Without it, the others are meaningless. Those Amendments are inalienable-that is, I was born with them, not granted them by some government. Those kids had as much right to life as anybody-as I do, as you do. But I didn’t take their right to live. An evil scumbag did, who didn’t care about their rights or your rights. Criminals never do. They infringe on the rights of others. They break laws, including gun laws. Do you believe someone who would murder would obey gun laws?

Taking away my right to own a gun would not have prevented this. He would have got a gun illegally on the black market. He could have purchased ammunition on the black market. He would still have killed.

The militia they were talking about was not like the National Guard or Reserve of today. It was the populace itself, armed, and self-trained, i.e. the ‘well-regulated’ phrase simply means well-disciplined, and had to do with their training in general, such as drill and ceremony. It had nothing to do with the regulating of firearms. The militia was by the people, and of the people, for their defense from tyranny. The second clause of the Amendment says it all, “(T)he right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Our Founding Fathers understood that the only defense from our own government is the people that are governed, and that the only defense they have is if they are armed as the government is. Every totalitarian state on earth keeps arms from their citizenry. The second we give up our right to bear arms, and throw ourselves on the good graces of our government, is the second we are enslaved, and at its mercy.

No doubt he would have still killed, but it certainly would have been far fewer people. Do dozens of human lives not count for anything? Also, keep in mind that when the 2nd Amendment was drafted, automatic and semi-automatic weapons didn’t exist, so our forefathers were unable to consider them as part of the amendment. Not only is it possible to address these AND maintain public rights to carry firearms, it is also the responsible thing to do.

Wrong. It’s time to stop coddling the mentally ill and deficient. I’m tired of law abiding people being blamed for the acts of mentally ill or unstable people. More laws cannot protect you or our children from these clowns.

” I agree that more laws won’t help protect the public from the mentally ill…”
Change “the mentally ill” to “people with HIV or AIDS.” I hope you’ll see the folly in your words.

no it isn’t.you are misinformed.

Its funny how these people who do these massacres were never mentally ill before they killed everyone,

No. A government function is public safety. I would rather see a building with padded walls being used in place of outpatient treatment relying on a mentally ill person to remember to take their meds. If rights need to be trod on, I vote for the right of freedom by the mentally deficient.

Nobody was talking about taking away your rights to own a gun but every time someone talks about ways to check into a persons background to see if they should have a gun the NRA goes into full scare mode and convinces people they’re in grave danger of losing their 2nd Amendment rights. People on both sides of the issue tend to go to far. If people could just learn to sit down and meet in the middle we would all benefit. I’ve been around guns all my life. I’ve been hunting since the 1950’s,I was in the Army in the 1960’s and I still hunt and fish and carry a concealed weapon when I feel the need but I have no use for some of the NRA’s views.

this kid wouldn’t be able to get a gun with the laws we have so again you fail.

Smart move. They’ve seen Obama “sit down and talk before”. He means do whatever I say and there will be no compromise. Obama’s Motto: Never let a crisis go to waste.

No, actually liberals are the masters of creating a crisis. They tell us that we shouldn’t say certain things or have certain mascots because others MIGHT get offended and might is the keyword here. What I am referring to is of course one of the liberals favorite, political correctness. The only thing political correctness has managed to do is create problems where there previously were none. Not once did I ever hear an Indian say they were offended by the Husson mascot when it was the Braves. Not once did I hear an atheist ever complain about people saying Merry Christmas until the liberals decided we shouldn’t do that anymore. There are many other examples. The only PC that I need is my personal computer. The United States would be much better off without political correctness that was brought to us by the liberals.

ummm what? I’m sorry after we massacred the indians, you think it is in good taste to use there names as our mascots? you have sick sense of logic