Connecticut school shooting: 18 children among 27 dead

[Cubs Suck]

Seems like the killer was suffering Asperger syndrome. How can someone with a psychological disorder have access to guns.
Do you really think that, when the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they wanted crazy people to have guns ? An autist with guns, is that your conception of "A well regulated Militia" ?

lol@ "founding fathers"

Like anyone gives a shit what a bunch of old white dudes dressed like fags had to say.

 

[Johan]

 

[Dman25]

Sickening, but not shocking given the state of society we live in. As for gun control..I'm all for banning assault and automatic weapons, and putting much more
stringent and rigorous controls on everything else. Whether that would be enough, who knows? The guy who murdered those kids lived in a State with strict
gun laws, didn't own the weapons (his mother did legally), and had no history of violence. although had mental issues. Maybe it's time to have armed guards at
all schools and places where multitudes congregate. Even then, it might not be enough to stop mayhem from happening.

 

[Sam Fisher]

Sickening, but not shocking given the state of society we live in. As for gun control..I'm all for banning assault and automatic weapons, and putting much more
stringent and rigorous controls on everything else. Whether that would be enough, who knows? The guy who murdered those kids lived in a State with strict
gun laws, didn't own the weapons (his mother did legally), and had no history of violence. although had mental issues. Maybe it's time to have armed guards at
all schools and places where multitudes congregate. Even then, it might not be enough to stop mayhem from happening.

While you're at it... be sure to ban Box Cutters as well.

 

[Will E Worm]

Your thoughs for the families won't prevent further killings. Strict gun laws would.

The school was a weapons free zone. Connecticut has very strict gun laws. Learn about things before you talk about them.

Connecticut gun laws among most strict in U.S. Link

The laws didn't work and never will.

Strict gun laws would only keep guns out of law abiding citizens hands, as is evidenced by Chicago. You're still a fucking idiot.

Yes :clap:

Criminals don't follow laws well. Liberals need to learn that.

 

[Sam Fisher]

When I was in school, these tragedies never happened. Yet, guns were far more easier to buy back then... in the mail, hardware stores, no background checks, etc.

So to those (Rey C.) who make fun of me because of my quote below, let me just say that I still stand behind my comment.

"Women have no place in politics, law enforcement, boards of education, etc. Women need to be in their home taking care of the tasks at hand - caring for their husband, children, housework, grocery shopping, cooking, laundry, etc."

 

[ApolloBalboa]

When I was in school, these tragedies never happened. Yet, guns were far more easier to buy back then... in the mail, hardware stores, no background checks, etc.

So to those (Rey C.) who make fun of me because of my quote below, let me just say that I still stand behind my comment.

"Women have no place in politics, law enforcement, boards of education, etc. Women need to be in their home taking care of the tasks at hand - caring for their husband, children, housework, grocery shopping, cooking, laundry, etc."

So, you're saying that if women go back to being housewives like they were when you were in school, these tragedies will never happen again?

Okay then....

 

[Johan]

The school was a weapons free zone. Connecticut has very strict gun laws. Learn about things before you talk about them.

Connecticut gun laws among most strict in U.S. Link

The laws didn't work and never will.

True, gun-free zones are stupid 'cause in case someone bring a gun there, people can't defend themselves.
Then, I see 2 possibles solutions :
-Give guns to teachers. If so, I bet we won't have to wait 2 full weeks before a teacher shoot a student.
-Strict gun laws that would prevent instable people to get guns.

Lanza was suffering from Asperger syndroma. An autist carrying guns, is that your conception of the "well regulated militia" mentioned ine the 2nd amendment ?



If someone would like to get a gun, I think it's OK if he proves himself to be responsible and psychologicaly stable enough.
This means :
Weapon-registration at the town hall (or the police).
Psychological evaluation prior to the delivery of a permit to carry weapons, evaluation renewed every 3 years with cancellation of the permit and obligation to return the weapon if you fail.
Keep the gun (no ammo) in a safe deposit box.
Keep apart the gun and ammunitions.
Mandatory training in the use, maintenance and storage of his gun at home.
Automatic guns banned


Guns in the hands of adult citizens, stable and responsible, yes. In the hands of anyone, even if they are unstable and iresponsible, no.

The guy responsible for this shooting used guns belonging to his mother. If they had been stored in a safe-deposit box with the ammunition stored separately, the shooting would not have happened.
The guy responsible for the Aurora shooting had bought its weapons and ammunition few weeks earlier on the internet. It certainly would not have passed the psychological evaluation. In addition, he used automatic guns capable of firing many cartridges very quickly with a single press of the trigger. Without this kind of weapon, there would surely have had less people killed

 

[Maggie Green]

I hope those parents had gift receipts.

I can't believe you posted this. I have never read something in such poor taste. Not funny, not at all.

 

[STDiva]

True, gun-free zones are stupid 'cause in case someone bring a gun there, people can't defend themselves.
Then, I see 2 possibles solutions :
-Give guns to teachers. If so, I bet we won't have to wait 2 full weeks before a teacher shoot a student.
-Strict gun laws that would prevent instable people to get guns.

Lanza was suffering from Asperger syndroma. An autist carrying guns, is that your conception of the "well regulated militia" mentioned ine the 2nd amendment ?



If someone would like to get a gun, I think it's OK if he proves himself to be responsible and psychologicaly stable enough.
This means :
Weapon-registration at the town hall (or the police).
Psychological evaluation prior to the delivery of a permit to carry weapons, evaluation renewed every 3 years with cancellation of the permit and obligation to return the weapon if you fail.
Keep the gun (no ammo) in a safe deposit box.
Keep apart the gun and ammunitions.
Mandatory training in the use, maintenance and storage of his gun at home.
Automatic guns banned


Guns in the hands of adult citizens, stable and responsible, yes. In the hands of anyone, even if they are unstable and iresponsible, no.

The guy responsible for this shooting used guns belonging to his mother. If they had been stored in a safe-deposit box with the ammunition stored separately, the shooting would not have happened.
The guy responsible for the Aurora shooting had bought its weapons and ammunition few weeks earlier on the internet. It certainly would not have passed the psychological evaluation. In addition, he used automatic guns capable of firing many cartridges very quickly with a single press of the trigger. Without this kind of weapon, there would surely have had less people killed

No, Johan. You don't live in America so you wouldn't understand. The constitution says we have the right to own guns. If letting some lunatic kill dozens of people every 2 months means I get to collect guns and have target practice because I'm scared the government might try to enslave us because kids play video games and women work and kids don't fight after school, than so be it.

 

[Johan]

If letting some lunatic kill dozens of people every 2 months means I get to collect guns and have target practice because I'm scared the government might try to enslave us because kids play video games and women work and kids don't fight after school, than so be it.

Congratulations, this is the wort post I ever read here (a I read Sam's and Will's posts).

 

[bobjustbob]

Gotta back Sammy to some point. If things were the same as far as family structure was back then, we may not have some of the problems we face today. Things were simpler then. The thing is that those days are gone. Generations evolve and we as a people move ahead with the times. We want more and can get it. Television was an open door to the world but back in the early 60's it became the vast wasteland. If Mom went out and worked then she could budget her time with the kids. Bring more into the house. Nicer vacations, bigger house, more goodies for the kids and stuff like that. Problem was that work started taking priority over the family. The Internet was the information superhighway. Now it is a substitution for personal interaction. Families are lost to their members without a handheld devices.

Now look at today's picture, kids are fucked up in many, many ways. They don't socialize in the old conventional ways. They can duck their parents more easily. They are allowed to make more of their own decisions at an earlier age. Society created that and now has to deal with it. I think a solution would be to to go back to the good old days but that just isn't going to happen. No family today would ever think of giving up their cell or computer, or cut their work to spend more personal time managing their family. If a kid was to play a sport it was with the intent to be there with their activity. Sit next to other parents in the stands. Today it's to get the kid's schedule to work with your's and make sure they text you if they need a ride home.

 

[Johan]

Gotta back Sammy to some point. If things were the same as far as family structure was back then, we may not have some of the problems we face today. Things were simpler then. The thing is that those days are gone. Generations evolve and we as a people move ahead with the times. We want more and can get it. Television was an open door to the world but back in the early 60's it became the vast wasteland. If Mom went out and worked then she could budget her time with the kids. Bring more into the house. Nicer vacations, bigger house, more goodies for the kids and stuff like that. Problem was that work started taking priority over the family. The Internet was the information superhighway. Now it is a substitution for personal interaction. Families are lost to their members without a handheld devices.

Now look at today's picture, kids are fucked up in many, many ways. They don't socialize in the old conventional ways. They can duck their parents more easily. They are allowed to make more of their own decisions at an earlier age. Society created that and now has to deal with it. I think a solution would be to to go back to the good old days but that just isn't going to happen. No family today would ever think of giving up their cell or computer, or cut their work to spend more personal time managing their family. If a kid was to play a sport it was with the intent to be there with their activity. Sit next to other parents in the stands. Today it's to get the kid's schedule to work with your's and make sure they text you if they need a ride home.

This is true. But French teenagers very different from US teenager. Still, French teenager don't get into schools with guns and star firing on kids and teachers. Why ? Because they don't have access to guns and since there are some very strict laws about guns, illegal guns are much more expensive so teenagers can't afford them.

 

[ApolloBalboa]

Gotta back Sammy to some point. If things were the same as far as family structure was back then, we may not have some of the problems we face today. Things were simpler then. The thing is that those days are gone. Generations evolve and we as a people move ahead with the times. We want more and can get it. Television was an open door to the world but back in the early 60's it became the vast wasteland. If Mom went out and worked then she could budget her time with the kids. Bring more into the house. Nicer vacations, bigger house, more goodies for the kids and stuff like that. Problem was that work started taking priority over the family. The Internet was the information superhighway. Now it is a substitution for personal interaction. Families are lost to their members without a handheld devices.

Now look at today's picture, kids are fucked up in many, many ways. They don't socialize in the old conventional ways. They can duck their parents more easily. They are allowed to make more of their own decisions at an earlier age. Society created that and now has to deal with it. I think a solution would be to to go back to the good old days but that just isn't going to happen. No family today would ever think of giving up their cell or computer, or cut their work to spend more personal time managing their family. If a kid was to play a sport it was with the intent to be there with their activity. Sit next to other parents in the stands. Today it's to get the kid's schedule to work with your's and make sure they text you if they need a ride home.

What you say brings a good point and I agree with it to some extent, but I'm not going to delve into separating each and every little idea into piles. Sam's point seems to be that everything was ideal back when and if it were the same today, it would be infallible that nothing bad (or nothing to this extent) would ever happen. I can appreciate the idea, but the way it's being put sounds entirely foolish.

 

[subguy]

This is true. But French teenagers very different from US teenager. Still, French teenager don't get into schools with guns and star firing on kids and teachers. Why ? Because they don't have access to guns and since there are some very strict laws about guns, illegal guns are much more expensive so teenagers can't afford them.

We don't need to imitate France. Why does Israel and Switzerland not have this issue? Because they don't have nut cases running around and folks mostly buy into their society. Thank Reagan for cutting so much out of mental health care to build his precious Star Wars. I'm an ex navy vet, and even I think his spending was excessive.

Also, people make fun of America for lacking culture, but firearms are a part of the culture we have.

Look at this scariness: The Muslims in Kansas City want a ban on free speech pertaining to insulting their profit. They say the insults breed much killing and violence. So if 100 Americans were killed by angry Muslims, should we be talking today about free speech control?

No, because it is too important. In a similar way, the second amendment is that important to prevent tyranny.

 

[TheOrangeCat]

We don't need to imitate France. .

Who in their right mind would?

Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys, each and every one of them ....

 

[Cubs Suck]

When I was in school, these tragedies never happened. Yet, guns were far more easier to buy back then... in the mail, hardware stores, no background checks, etc.

So to those (Rey C.) who make fun of me because of my quote below, let me just say that I still stand behind my comment.

"Women have no place in politics, law enforcement, boards of education, etc. Women need to be in their home taking care of the tasks at hand - caring for their husband, children, housework, grocery shopping, cooking, laundry, etc."

Rey C. is just a dumb Mexican. He posts from the ICE detention center. You won't have to deal with him after he's returned to his village of Sinaloa

 

[TheOrangeCat]

Rey C. is just a dumb Mexican. He posts from the ICE detention center. You won't have to deal with him after he's returned to his village of Sinaloa

A racist, sub-educated moron says 'what' ?

 

[Cubs Suck]

Also, people make fun of America for lacking culture, but firearms are a part of the culture we have.

America has lots of culture. It had a lot before 1620, when the illegals started border hopping the Atlantic.

But they brought culture here. Italian, Spanish, German, Muslim. Good cultures.

Firearms aren't part of American culture. Americans never had firearms, they used bow and arrows.

 

[Cubs Suck]

A racist, sub-educated moron says 'what' ?

That Sam Fisher's post was "sexist"