Date: Dec 17, 2012 6:14 AM
Author: Jeff Bishop
Subject: Re: Would effective gun control laws be 'unacceptable social engineering'?

Unless, of course, your definition of Scandinavia includes Finland or
Norway, in which case the price of being Scandinavian is both high taxes
and acceptance of mass public shootings on a level that makes Americans
blush. You're probably right that nothing will change. On the mental
health side, that's unfortunate. On the gun rights side, nothing should
change, except to get rid of more "gun-free zones," where every mass public
shooting save one has occurred. And that one is the exception that proves
the rule; Jared Loughner didn't select a Safeway lot because he thought it
was teh easiest place to kill as many people as possible. He selected it
because he was after a single individual, Congresswoman Giffords, who
happened to be there. What was intended as an individual assassination
only turned to a spree because, laws aside, no one else at the scene
happened to be armed.


On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 2:11 AM, Gary Tupper <gtupper@peda.com> wrote:

> Regrettably, I believe Rob, Jeff & Wayne reflect the common American's
> position: in the same way that the price of being Scandinavian is high
> taxes; the price of being Haitian is poverty etc, the price of being
> American is acceptance of violence.
>
> I doubt that anything will really change after the vigils, candles &
> hand-wringing is over.
>
> Gary Tupper
>
>
> On 12/16/2012 8:23 PM, Robert Hansen wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 16, 2012, at 9:36 PM, Jeff Bishop <Jeff@Bishop.NET> wrote:
>
> I agree with all of my dad's points, save one. Restrictions on nuclear
> weapons are, in my opinion, not infringements. For one thing, nukes are
> not weapons individuals can bear, so they are arguably not "arms" within
> the meaning of the Second Amendment.
>
>
> I don't think explosives was ever a consideration though ammunition does
> require powder. In my opinion, arms obviously meant guns and has always
> meant guns.
>
> People think this is new. Sadly, it isn't. In 1937 a monster every bit
> the equal to this one blew up an elementary school in Bath Michigan,
> killing 38 children.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
>
> In Japan and China they use knives.
>
> If it isn't guns, bombs, knives or poison then these monsters just use
> their bare hands and strangle them, one at a time.
>
> Obama spoke tonight...
>
> "We can't accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to
> say that we're powerless in the face of such carnage?" Obama said. That
> the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence
> visited on our children year, after year, after year is somehow the price
> of our freedom?"
>
> Yeah, unfortunately, this is the price we pay for freedom. We can't even
> keep gang members off the street. How the hell are we going to put enough
> "odd" people under surveillance just hoping to stop the rarest of sickos
> like this monster?
>
> Considering the number of gun deaths in Illinois, I wasn't even aware
> they had a ban on guns. More people are murdered in Chicago, with guns,
> than troops dying in Afghanistan. A lot more. What kind of gun ban is that?
>
> Just like education, if we want to understand how other countries
> achieve lower murder rates (there actually isn't that many of them) then go
> examine them to see how they achieve lower murder rates. I don't think it
> hinges on a lack of guns, though I could see the lack of interest in guns
> (in those countries) hinging on not being worried as much about being
> killed.
>
> Bob Hansen
>
>
>