28 killed at elementary school

[Captain Awesome]

If they put armed guards in the schools, the nutters will simply rework their strategy. Take out the guard first comes to mind. I doubt very much that a single guard could do much against someone wearing body armour and equipped with 100 round magazines.

Here's a difference between shooting a 20 round magazine and 2 10rounders:

Also talks about what is "assault" rifle and how the term is used incorrectly. And how pointless the law in discussion is.

[Atomoa]

SurplusElect The NRA is a direct lobby for gun manufactures. The NRA is a group of gun manufactures - selling their product under the guise/shadow of the 2nd amendment. It is not a "civil rights group" - it is a business lobby group.

The more "guns in peoples hands" the richer they and their friends who pay their salaries get. This school program proposal is a huge potential contract for their friends.

This is like Enbridge being in charge of pipeline regulations.

Why is this not being discussed?

Thanks for the 'ammo' to add to my posts over here:

http://forums.castanet.net/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=48285#p1399517

http://forums.castanet.net/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=48285#p1399635

Really?? I would like to know more about why NRA is being allowed to be part of decision making that directly fattens their pockets. And drastically affects the lives of people throughout that country. Instead of providing more "ammo" for other discussions about gun control and the NRA, lets discuss this.

How in anyone's mind is this right or possible?

Where is the logic in stopping gun violence with more guns? How do we put fire out? By adding more fuel?

What kind of image is that for children to go school and see an armed guard. Isn't it bad enough that kids have to go through airport security like situations in some schools already? What kind of imprint does that make on a 5, 6, 7 year old? Talk about introducing the harsh realities of a first world nation early on eh?

[Captain Awesome]

What kind of image is that for children to go school and see an armed guard. Isn't it bad enough that kids have to go through airport security like situations in some schools already? What kind of imprint does that make on a 5, 6, 7 year
old? Talk about introducing the harsh realities of a first world nation early on eh?

While I don't support armed guards at school, your argument is completely unfounded. Seeing somebody with a firearm is traumatic now? What about when they see a police officer on a street, do they start stuttering and develop mental problems? Get real, seeing somebody with a gun in a holster doesn't turn kids into damaged goods.

[grammafreddy]

Really?? I would like to know more about why NRA is being allowed to be part of decision making that directly fattens their pockets. And drastically affects the lives of people throughout that country. Instead of providing more "ammo" for other discussions about gun control and the NRA, lets discuss this.

How in anyone's mind is this right or possible?
The NRA specializes in training and safe handling of firearms - it was their original purpose and it remains their purpose today.

http://membership.nrahq.org/about-us.asp

http://home.nra.org/#/nraorg/wall/education_training


Where is the logic in stopping gun violence with more guns? How do we put fire out? By adding more fuel?
Ever heard of a back burn?

What kind of image is that for children to go school and see an armed guard. Isn't it bad enough that kids have to go through airport security like situations in some schools already? What kind of imprint does that make on a 5, 6, 7 year old? Talk about introducing the harsh realities of a first world nation early on eh?
Children accept things far more readily and reasonably than adults give them credit for. Usually its a hysterical adult that sets them off and scares the bleep outta them and instills the fear. Calm down.

[SurplusElect]

The NRA specializes in training and safe handling of firearms - it was their original purpose and it remains their purpose today.

In the 1800's the NRA was formed because the civilian militia couldn't hit a barn door with a musket. So they formed a group to train people to shoot better and kill other humans more efficiently.

If you think the NRA is a "safety group" you are severely incorrect. That is like taking BP Oil's "Better for the Environment" slogan and saying they are a environmental protection company!

The NRA is a lobby group for gun ownership because their employers manufacture guns. Training and safety is just window dressing - look at where their money comes from.

[WhatThe]

While I don't support armed guards at school, your argument is completely unfounded. Seeing somebody with a firearm is traumatic now? What about when they see a police officer on a street, do they start stuttering and develop mental problems? Get real, seeing somebody with a gun in a holster doesn't turn kids into damaged goods.

Perhaps not "damaged" but desensitize children to think that our current paradigm of escalation is the answer when clearly a different tack is needed with a multidisciplinary approach.

While traveling in Europe about ten years ago I strolled in front of two state police officers both with automatic machine guns slung over their shoulders. As I walked by I looked at them but mostly down the barrel of one of those rifles. As a Canadian guy who has only seen a holstered RCMP pistol (besides the odd shotgun, 22, pistol etc. at the range) I found it rather disconcerting. What were we doing right, or perhaps what were they doin wrong that I had never seen that in my country.

[dogbreath]

Choose your own crime stats

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0

[steven lloyd]

Here's a difference between shooting a 20 round magazine and 2 10rounders:

Also talks about what is "assault" rifle and how the term is used incorrectly. And how pointless the law in discussion is.

That was good Captain. Thanks. (those weapons have come a long way since I served) Got to admit that semi-automatic looked pretty effective as well though and still quite capable of shooting a lot of people in a very short period of time. Ya gotta wonder too why hunters would want a hunting rifle designed to be an imitation of an assault rifle. Is that kinda like buying a new truck every three years? I don’t know (no longer being much of a gun aficionado).

This is the bad boy we used back in my day ...

http://www.eme421.com/FNC1A1.html

This was the 9mm SMG in use at that time:

http://www.modelguns.co.uk/images/sterlingmgc13.jpg

[SurplusElect]

The thing is about "fully automatic" is that you can't hit a barn door with "full auto". The rounds go all over the place, as well as the weapon in your hands.

A military solider will fire his "assault rifle" in semi-automatic mode or single shot if he wants to kill someone. If he wants to suppress the enemy and keep them from poking their heads out - they will lay down automatic assault rifle fire and the rounds will fly all over the place and the enemy will not pop their heads up to see if its safe to shoot back. "Suppressing fire" - it's not suppose to hit anything.

So these "this isn't a assault rifle" posts/videos are playing with technicalities on technicalities.

Yes - you can't buy fully automatic weapons, but technically if you want to kill people "as fast as you can pull the trigger" (semi automatic) is much more accurate and effective. That is how they teach soldiers to kill.

On the surface however "this gun isn't automatic" seems like a good gauge of safety and that's what they are banking on.

...not to mention those kids were killed by a "non-assault rifle"

[Captain Awesome]

Got to admit that semi-automatic looked pretty effective as well though and still quite capable of shooting a lot of people in a very short period of time.

Well, so is any other gun really - except for bolt action rifle (although my bolt action rifle reloads very quickly). I think the point of the clip was that "assault" rifles that are being talked about are no different than any other semi-auto rifle out there - yes they do have a pistol grip, a scary looking railing system, and collapsible stock - but none of these accessories do the actual shooting or make the rifle more dangerous. At the end of the day a semi-auto hunting rifle or semi-auto sporting rifle are no different.

Ya gotta wonder too why hunters would want a hunting rifle designed to be an imitation of an assault rifle.

Dunno. I owned AR-15 myself a while ago (I don't anymore) - and thought it was rather cool but useless. Hunting rifles are more appropriate for hunting, AR-15 is more of a show piece. But once again, they're not that different except for cosmetic differences.

This is the bad boy we used back in my day ...

http://www.eme421.com/FNC1A1.html

7.62mm, ouch! You must have served before everybody started moving towards smaller cartridges, it was 5.45 when I did my time.

[steven lloyd]

The thing is about "fully automatic" is that you can't hit a barn door with "full auto". The rounds go all over the place, as well as the weapon in your hands.

Actually, that's not quite true. I haven't used a modern automatic rifle, but the SMG I posted a link to "pulled" up to the right. In other words, you aimed low left and let it pull up to the right in bursts. Very effective in close confined spaces.

[steven lloyd]

7.62mm, ouch! You must have served before everybody started moving towards smaller cartridges, it was 5.45 when I did my time.

I am getting a little "long in the tooth".

[Captain Awesome]

Perhaps not "damaged" but desensitize children to think that our current paradigm of escalation is the answer when clearly a different tack is needed with a multidisciplinary approach.

Well, almost every country in the world arms their police officers (except for UK even though it's changing), and seeing them with side firearms is desensitizing kids? A bit of a leap in logic, don't you think? What kind of imprint seeing RCMP officers left on you when you were a kid?

[WhatThe]

Well, almost every country in the world arms their police officers (except for UK even though it's changing), and seeing them with side firearms is desensitizing kids? A bit of a leap in logic, don't you think? What kind of imprint seeing RCMP officers left on you when you were a kid?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. Just saying that our answer for everything is escalation. Ill use the drug war as an example. The scientific facts are there, if we fund poverty, treatment and mental health society could realise a large savings in lives, health, crime and money but that just doesn't feel good to the emotionally charged and knowledge bereft, they want more cops, jails and bigger sentences even though forty years of escalation paradigm has made things worse.
Because we as a society are too stupid or frightened to try new approaches we always fall back to the way things have been done for millennia - get a bigger stick than the other guy has.
That to me is just as frightening and sends a message that has been perpetuated since the literal Stone Ages. I wouldn't want my kid to grow up in an atmosphere of such as this; because we are unwilling to use anything but violent deterrent that spawns more violence and abrogates our charter rights.

[Captain Awesome]

Just saying that our answer for everything is escalation.

Oh, I agree there. As you might have noticed, I did mention I'm against armed guards at school. I just had to respond to an inane argument that seeing handguns damages fragile kids worlds beyond repair and makes them wet beds and have nightmares.