A Mother, a Gun Enthusiast and the First Victim

More guns in a society don't make that society any safer. It just makes it easier for criminals to get their hands on guns.

Criminals don't abide by laws to begin with. We've been over this time and again. The school is also a “gun-free” zone. Those laws don't seem to apply to nuts and criminals. The murderer had severe emotional issues. Why not address those, too? It's easier to go after guns.

Guns aren't the only object used in murders. Ban those other tools? Riiight.

Of course they don't abide by laws. BUt if everybody has a gun then it's much easier to acquire such a gun by other methods of crime. Theft, burglary, robbery, etc. Or maybe paying somebody to go buy a gun legally, sell it to you and just report it stolen. If nobody had access to guns, then all of the above would be MUCH MUCH harder.

No doubt did the murderer have emotional issues. That's what makes it even worse that it's legal for people to have guns at home where kids like this have easy access to.

Murder can be committed by any kind of weapon. But why make it easier and more efficient for a murderer to kill somebody by giving him access to guns??
What if the guy had walked into the school with a knife or a bat? He never would have been able to kill so many people. And the chance of stopping somebody that is wielding a knife or a bat are MUCH greater than stopping somebody with a gun.... not to mention a semi-automatic rifle!!!!!

BubbleBliss wrote:Of course they don't abide by laws. BUt if everybody has a gun then it's much easier to acquire such a gun by other methods of crime. Theft, burglary, robbery, etc. Or maybe paying somebody to go buy a gun legally, sell it to you and just report it stolen. If nobody had access to guns, then all of the above would be MUCH MUCH harder.

No doubt did the murderer have emotional issues. That's what makes it even worse that it's legal for people to have guns at home where kids like this have easy access to.

Murder can be committed by any kind of weapon. But why make it easier and more efficient for a murderer to kill somebody by giving him access to guns??
What if the guy had walked into the school with a knife or a bat? He never would have been able to kill so many people. And the chance of stopping somebody that is wielding a knife or a bat are MUCH greater than stopping somebody with a gun.... not to mention a semi-automatic rifle!!!!!

I'll tell you right now that any law that the Democrats will try to pass in light of this will come under stiff opposition by US citizens. I can tell you that much. I know lots of people who are Dem voters (not that it shouldn't matter) who are gun enthusiasts. They'll revolt against the stiffs they elected to represent them.

Why pick at guns? See? I can tell an anti-gun person just by your response. Get rid of the guns and that gets rid of the problem. Bullshit. It doesn't. Ask the families that were left behind by McVeigh's actions (fertilizer and sodium nitrate).

There's no such thing as a semi-automatic weapon. It's either an auto or not. That's another phrase invented by leftists.

That doesn't have anything to do with the facts I just presented you with!?
I know plenty of people in Kentucky and in Michigan that would support a gun ban. Obviously it's too late to ban flat out guns now since people like you have made it possible for every nut job in America to get their hands on a gun. But it's never too late to extremely limit the amount of new guns flowing into society.

And a semi-automatic weapon differs from an automatic weapon, because it only fires one round when you pull the trigger, no more. Other firearms need to be loaded manually for each shot. That's why it is called semi-automatic, because it doesnt have to be loaded for each shot, but it only shoots one shot per trigger pull, unlike an automatic weapon.
Do you have proof that leftists invented that phrase? Or are you making one of those wild statements like the ones you always got on NextPrez on for?

BubbleBliss wrote:
That doesn't have anything to do with the facts I just presented you with!?
I know plenty of people in Kentucky and in Michigan that would support a gun ban. Obviously it's too late to ban flat out guns now since people like you have made it possible for every nut job in America to get their hands on a gun. But it's never too late to extremely limit the amount of new guns flowing into society.

And a semi-automatic weapon differs from an automatic weapon, because it only fires one round when you pull the trigger, no more. Other firearms need to be loaded manually for each shot. That's why it is called semi-automatic, because it doesnt have to be loaded for each shot, but it only shoots one shot per trigger pull, unlike an automatic weapon.
Do you have proof that leftists invented that phrase? Or are you making one of those wild statements like the ones you always got on NextPrez on for?

And I know tons of people here in Minnesota (a liberal state at that) who would scoff at a ban or curtailment of guns. Most of these people are Democrats. So, your knowledge of people in KY and MI is moot as is mine.

I know what an auto and "semi-auto" is. The fact is, an automatic weapon fires rounds till exhausted while holding down the trigger.

Automatic weapons are illegal in this country unless approved by the ATF and that's an extensive move by them to allow you to have one.

Gun owners, as a general rule, are more conservative. Most leftists abhor guns. It's fairly evident anywhere you go on the 'net.

As far as the NP remark, now you're backseat modding.