Another one again!

[clintonhater]

The threat of anti-socials isn't going away, and calling it a Mental Health Problem equals doing nothing at all because there is no mental health system in this country.

What's a "system"? Thousands make their livings as psychiatrists, psychologists, & associated professions. True, most of their clients are neurotic women, because the true crazies are never going to report themselves voluntarily. Poor folks can obtain services through Medicaid. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

[leftyo]

it is a mental health problem, brought on by the liberal feel good way of raising kids.

[Dick Hosmer]

I could be wrong, as I really don't follow these terrible things, but it seems to me that a common thread occurs - that being that "notification" or "warnings" of some sort WAS given in many of the cases. Could it be possible - in light of other situations now in the news - that some sort of nebulous blanket directive has been given to ignore, or foot-drag, on such warnings - hoping that enough events will ultimately occur so as to force draconian gun control on the populace? I'm 80 years old and no threat to anyone - couldn't care less about "black rifles" - but do fear for the loss of our freedom. I fervently hope that I am wrong, but just had to get the thought off my chest.

[bostonbound]

One thing no longer really up for debate...AR actions in 5.56 with hi cap mags are the tool of choice for these shootings. Or is it coincidence?

It is also the weapon of choice for High Power and Service matches. OK, we'll ban those along with the rifle.

Ban the AR-15, and it will be another semiautomatic used. Heck, they make 100 round magazines for Ruger 10/22s. A 22LR bullet will kill as well.

Togor - Where do YOU want to draw the line, and why?

[Vern Humphrey]

I'm just an old infantryman, but I know a thing or two about tactics. All these shooting occur at "soft" targets -- gun-free zones.

What do you do about soft targets? HARDEN them!

And when faced with an attacker with a lethal weapon and a determination to kill, the only answer is to have your own lethal weapon.

[togor]

Bans are not the answer any more than doing nothing because it's impossible to stop them all, which is leftyo's position. Comparison to cars is apt. Traffic fatalities still happen but we try stuff to make cars safer and keep drunks and bad drivers in general off the road. I'd make it less convenient for the anti-social types to procure certain classes of weapons. I personally don't relish the thought of jumping through more hoops to execute firearms purchases (right now there are barely any), but if more hoops stop even one school shooting every five years then why not. In the old days stuff like that was called "doing one's civic duty". I tell you what though, if guns and crazies can't get along well enough to the satisfaction of the broader public, it's an easy guess which will have to go.

[JB White]

Togor, you've had a great participation in this thread without pissin on anyones corn flakes. I'm going to call you on one thing and it's only to call attention to the subject itself.

You said:

...but if more hoops stop even one school shooting every five years then why not.

Herin lies a problem. If they don't happen then how does anyone know it was stopped? A simple reduction of incidents overall will be a good thing but it will not shut up the "Government do something" types who will cry out for more more more when the others happen.
These are the same people who claim CC has done nothing to stop mass shootings. In spite of shooters being dropped in their tracks by someone legally armed, the anti's have set the number it takes to be considered a mass shooting. Whenever a legal firearm has halted a spree, the few unfortunate victims are called "multiple homicide" because the magic number wasn't reached. If that number is indeed reached, they can still say that CC has NEVER stopped a mass shooting.
This is the mindset we are up against.

[leftyo]

Bans are not the answer any more than doing nothing because it's impossible to stop them all, which is leftyo's position. Comparison to cars is apt. Traffic fatalities still happen but we try stuff to make cars safer and keep drunks and bad drivers in general off the road. I'd make it less convenient for the anti-social types to procure certain classes of weapons. I personally don't relish the thought of jumping through more hoops to execute firearms purchases (right now there are barely any), but if more hoops stop even one school shooting every five years then why not. In the old days stuff like that was called "doing one's civic duty". I tell you what though, if guns and crazies can't get along well enough to the satisfaction of the broader public, it's an easy guess which will have to go.

what you fail to grasp in your tiny little mind is people who want to kill other people are going to get their weapons no matter how many laws you enact, or how difficult you make it for everyone else. pass more laws, its not going to stop the shootings. criminals do not obey laws, its that simple. we have to change the mindset of kids so they dont grow up and turn into aholes that want to kill people. unfortunately liberals like you have forced upon us kids that cant handle life, and when they implode decide to take others with them.

[togor]

I hear you JB, but you left out the other part of my post. Old fashioned idea of "civic duty". Call me naive but believe that's our best way forward, take a stand for what a reasonable society ought to look like and accept that everyone has a role to play. Most people don't want to live in a world where the trip between home and school takes their kids "outside the wire" (even though in some places that is sadly already the case). As gun owners we ignore this at our peril in the long run, for whatever short term advantages we enjoy.

I got extra searches twice of my bag on a recent trip by the TSA folks. Apparently cheese really stands out on their scanners, like explosives. So I let them do their job and be on my way. To me the nut that tries to blow up a plane is in the same category as the nut who tries to shoot up a school. I'm far from naive on this topic JB. I want to keep what I have and not lose it because we let things go too far.

- - - Updated - - -

Leftyo you don't want to do anything different. Fine, that's your opinion. No need to attack me for stating mine.

[leftyo]

I hear you JB, but you left out the other part of my post. Old fashioned idea of "civic duty". Call me naive but believe that's our best way forward, take a stand for what a reasonable society ought to look like and accept that everyone has a role to play. Most people don't want to live in a world where the trip between home and school takes their kids "outside the wire" (even though in some places that is sadly already the case). As gun owners we ignore this at our peril in the long run, for whatever short term advantages we enjoy.

I got extra searches twice of my bag on a recent trip by the TSA folks. Apparently cheese really stands out on their scanners, like explosives. So I let them do their job and be on my way. To me the nut that tries to blow up a plane is in the same category as the nut who tries to shoot up a school. I'm far from naive on this topic JB. I want to keep what I have and not lose it because we let things go too far.

- - - Updated - - -

Leftyo you don't want to do anything different. Fine, that's your opinion. No need to attack me for stating mine.

so your the one who cant read . i never said a damned thing about not wanting to do nothing. we need to change how we raise our kids, as a society. adding more stupid laws that dont actually work, is DOING NOTHING, thats your choice. we have proven over and over again, so often that laws dont stop criminals, yet thats the liberal thing, "we need more laws, need more control" its absolute insanity to keep passing feel good laws that dont fix the god damned problem! as far as attacking, you do the same to others so live with it. hell the FBI recieved a tip on this dirtbag killer, and they didnt follow up on it. what in the hell good are more laws going to do, we do not enforce the ones we have? this is a long term problem brought on over the last 30-40yrs, and simple legislation is not going to fix it. until people realize it is how kids are being raised, nothing will change. if folks finally figure this out, it is still going to take time, it will not happen over night.

[clintonhater]

it is a mental health problem, brought on by the liberal feel good way of raising kids.

As simplistic as this may sound to some, this really IS the answer in a nutshell--kids brought up without discipline or respect for others, handed a cellphone in elementary school, etc. Of course, once they reach school age, if their parents are so apathetic as to put them into a public school, indoctrination into the "liberal feel good way" of approaching life will only be intensified--a vicious cycle.

[Fred]

Nobody will be coming out to point a finger at the Russian Adoption agencies who're selling adoptions of children with severe mental disorders and afflictions like this shooter has to U. S. Couples.
That would put the Cabaash on the Russian Adoption business and deprive some Russian kids from coming to America.
It would also look mean and heartless for anyone to point out the problem. Bad for a political career maybe?

[togor]

As simplistic as this may sound to some, this really IS the answer in a nutshell--kids brought up without discipline or respect for others, handed a cellphone in elementary school, etc. Of course, once they reach school age, if their parents are so apathetic as to put them into a public school, indoctrination into the "liberal feel good way" of approaching life will only be intensified--a vicious cycle.

What about Adam Lanza's mom? Seems she tried to do things the right way. She was the first to get it. The Aurora , CO shooter--blame his parents? Teachers? Moviegoers? If "blame society" is a lame excuse when a black kid gets into trouble, then it's a lame excuse when someone goes off the rails and shoots up a school.

In cases of organic conditions in the brain, values education counts for little. Need a backup plan. But what I'm hearing is that the idea that we remain our "brother's keeper" is incompatible with the second amendment. Why is that so?

[clintonhater]

What about Adam Lanza's mom? Seems she tried to do things the right way.

Being a "single mom," regardless how much that sad state of affairs is now extolled & glorified, isn't doing things the right way. Neither was coddling such a pathetic freak by allowing him undeserved privileges the right way. In some ways, she was as disturbed as he was--else it would have been obvious to her that "this kid is really sick!"

But I agree that the true "bad seed" isn't going to profit from instruction, good role models, etc. One of the obstacles to doing anything about them is that chiseled in stone tenet of liberal dogma which declares "there's no such thing as a bad kid--only kids that were deprived of the "nurturing" they deserved." At the first sign of trouble, which usually occurs in elementary if not kindergarten, they ought to be yanked out of school, and institutionalized--for life if necessary. Think that idea will get very far with the PTA?

[togor]

The reason I think the mental health angle won't get very far is that life is full of shades of grey. Set a screen with some real teeth in it to weed out those who shouldn't have firearms, and there are bound to be a few false positives, just like there are SNAFUs with No Fly Lists, or any list for that matter. Only in the case of a No Buy List error, the NRA will rain down missiles of righteous indignation enough to scare the bejeezus out of any politician.

That's why I think part of the solution is to raise the bar on some purchases, make them harder, in a we're-all-in-this-together way, such that the deviants crash-and-burn in the process. I know that's really unpopular here, but I think that's just a case of confusion on the right. Somewhere along the way, people confused being "against socialism" and "anti-social" as the same thing. They're not. Some of the really old guys here know what I mean but probably don't want the headache that would come with publicly agreeing with me.