Yet another school shooting

[Miles]

I'm not calling for a total ban. I'd like to see the ''right to bear arms' become the 'privilege of bearing arms'.

There's your starting point.

I believe we are mostly there now. The application process requires waiting periods for back round checks which include not only criminal but in many cases mental health information. In this case the weapons were legally purchased by someone who was well qualified. I don't have facts and figures however I believe that most gun related deaths are caused by illegally aquired weapons. Collecting the unauthorized firearms is a near impossible task. The drug trade, which is extensive, feeds the drugs and guns onto our streets. That is a sad inditement of our society. A war on drugs won't work but perhaps a war on drug dealers might. I have been a long time proponent of turning the 82nd and 101st Airborne loose on the drug trade with strict orders that resistence be met with absolute force. There again that pesky Constitution gets in the way.

Unfortunately the current situation is a tragic example of someones inability to seperate fantisy from reality, mores the pity. All those wonderful innocent children slautered and the best they get here is a discussion about gun control. May they rest in a peace they were denied in death.

[Gob]

Legalising drugs would take the market out of the dealers hands, and make the drug war unnecessary.

[Miles]

Legalising drugs would take the market out of the dealers hands, and make the drug war unnecessary.

Very possible however the gangs who deal them will still want the money and power they have grown accustomed too. They used to call it a drug culture now it is a dirty ruthless business run by degenerate meglomanics infested with sciopaths with no regard for human life who can operate from inside the walls of the most secure prisons.

[dales]

Names and ages of the 26 people gunned down at a Connecticut elementary school Friday in the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history:

Charlotte Bacon, 6

Daniel Barden, 7

Rachel Davino, 29

Olivia Engel, 6

Josephine Gay, 7

Ana Marquez-Greene, 6

Dylan Hockley, 6

Dawn Hochsprung, 47

Madeleine Hsu, 6

Catherine Hubbard, 6

Chase Kowalski, 7

Jesse Lewis, 6

James Mattioli, 6

Grace McDonnell, 7

Anne Marie Murphy, 52

Emilie Parker, 6

Jack Pinto, 6

Noah Pozner, 6

Caroline Previdi, 6

Jessica Rekos, 6

Avielle Richman, 6

Lauren Rousseau, 30

Mary Sherlach, 56

Victoria Soto,27

Benjamin Wheeler, 6

Allison Wyatt, 6

Source: Connecticut State Police

[Guinevere]

Thanks Dales, I gave them their own thread this morning before I saw you had posted them here.

[Guinevere]

What do our American chums think of this?

Current Australian firearm laws

State laws govern the possession and use of firearms in Australia. These laws were largely aligned under the 1996 National Agreement on Firearms. Anyone wishing to possess or use a firearm must have a Firearms Licence and, with some exceptions, be over the age of 18. Owners must have secure storage for their firearms.

Before someone can buy a firearm, he or she must obtain a Permit To Acquire. The first permit has a mandatory 28-day delay before it is first issued. In some states (e.g., Queensland, Victoria, and New South Wales), this is waived for second and subsequent firearms of the same class. For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defence is not accepted as a reason for issuing a license, even though it may be legal under certain circumstances to use a legally held firearm for self-defence.

Each firearm in Australia must be registered to the owner by serial number. Some states allow an owner to store or borrow another person's registered firearm of the same category.


Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.

Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.

Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.

Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of six months using club handguns, and a minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun.

Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38 or 9mm calibre or less and magazines may hold a maximum of 10 rounds. Participants in certain "approved" pistol competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is approved for 9mm/.38/.357 handguns that meet the IPSC rules, but larger calibers are not approved for IPSC handgun shooting contests. Category H barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols unless the pistols are clearly ISSF target pistols: magazines are restricted to 10 rounds. Handguns held as part of a collection were exempted from these limits.

Category R/E: Restricted weapons: machine guns, rocket launchers, assault rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, Howitzers, artillery, etc. can be owned by collectors in some states provided that these weapons have been rendered permanently inoperable. They are subject to the same storage and licensing requirements as fully functioning firearms.

Certain Antique firearms can in some states be legally held without licences. In other states they are subject to the same requirements as modern firearms.

All single-shot muzzleloading firearms manufactured before 1 January 1901 are considered antique firearms. Four states require licences for antique percussion revolvers and cartridge repeating firearms, but in Queensland and Victoria a person may possess such a firearm without a licence, so long as the firearm is registered (percussion revolvers require a license in Victoria).

Australia has very tight restrictions on items which are far less controlled in comparable societies such as the UK. Air pistols, elsewhere unrestricted, are as difficult to get as centrefire and rimfire handguns, and low-powered airguns are as difficult as cartridge arms to license. Airsoft guns are banned in all states and non-firing replicas banned in most. Suppressors (or 'silencers') which are legal in the UK and New Zealand, are extremely restricted in Australia to a few government bodies.

I'd have to think it through more before I can comment, *but* at least one NYTimes commenter has raised the success of the Australian laws in a column this morning:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/opini ... -this.html

Excerpt re: Australia:

Other countries offer a road map. In Australia in 1996, a mass killing of 35 people galvanized the nation’s conservative prime minister to ban certain rapid-fire long guns. The “national firearms agreement,” as it was known, led to the buyback of 650,000 guns and to tighter rules for licensing and safe storage of those remaining in public hands.

The law did not end gun ownership in Australia. It reduced the number of firearms in private hands by one-fifth, and they were the kinds most likely to be used in mass shootings.

In the 18 years before the law, Australia suffered 13 mass shootings — but not one in the 14 years after the law took full effect. The murder rate with firearms has dropped by more than 40 percent, according to data compiled by the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, and the suicide rate with firearms has dropped by more than half.

[Guinevere]

I'm not calling for a total ban. I'd like to see the ''right to bear arms' become the 'privilege of bearing arms'.

There's your starting point.

I believe we are mostly there now. The application process requires waiting periods for back round checks which include not only criminal but in many cases mental health information. In this case the weapons were legally purchased by someone who was well qualified. I don't have facts and figures however I believe that most gun related deaths are caused by illegally aquired weapons. Collecting the unauthorized firearms is a near impossible task. The drug trade, which is extensive, feeds the drugs and guns onto our streets. That is a sad inditement of our society. A war on drugs won't work but perhaps a war on drug dealers might. I have been a long time proponent of turning the 82nd and 101st Airborne loose on the drug trade with strict orders that resistence be met with absolute force. There again that pesky Constitution gets in the way.

Unfortunately the current situation is a tragic example of someones inability to seperate fantisy from reality, mores the pity. All those wonderful innocent children slautered and the best they get here is a discussion about gun control. May they rest in a peace they were denied in death.

How can we be almost there now, in light of what happened on Friday?

And the best way I can think of honoring these children and their teachers is working to make sure that another horrific tragedy like this doesn't happen again -- which necessarily requires a discussion of gun control. If you don't think that *everyone* here is grieving with Newtown, you've lost your connection to reality.

[Miles]

How can we be almost there now, in light of what happened on Friday?

And the best way I can think of honoring these children and their teachers is working to make sure that another horrific tragedy like this doesn't happen again -- which necessarily requires a discussion of gun control. If you don't think that *everyone* here is grieving with Newtown, you've lost your connection to reality.[/quote]

Just how does this sterile debate even have credibility with the current situation. What safe guards would you suggest to prevent this woman from purchasing the weapons used in this horrendous crime? Furthermore all the talk here will be just that, futile gestures filled with rightness indignation and great deal of frustration. Please do not presume to address my "connection with reality" until you have actually seen what was presented to the emergency personal who entered that school. I have been there and done that and every face will live forever in the hearts and minds of everyone who was and is involved. Time is not a friend in these situations but rather a curse.

WE all have a definate resonsibility to society to try to effect changes that will make something like this less likely to happen again. In my opinion this is not the bandwagon for that endevour. If anyone here really wants to work to make sure that it does not happen again get into a public discussion and make certain you have a viable solution so you can be taken seriously. Intelligent solutions illicit responsible replies, chest thumping and drum beating emotional outbursts are mostly ignored by serious people. Here is a visual image for you to carry with you for a while. A room full of 6 and 7 year old children shaking in terror seeing their friends killed in front of them until it was their turn. That is reality!

[rubato]

"...


I don’t have the motivation to do that; among other things I don’t have the time. It ranks low on my priority list. If I had the time I would prefer to build me a reciprocating lumbering saw, but I probally won’t get around to that either. But only to scooter is making a gun is equivalent to brain surgery.

I don’t know if this is real but I have seen a homemade deer rifle:
http://www.thehomegunsmith.com/

Your posts continue to prove that scooter (and I) are right.

I looked through the directions provided and in order to make this gun you would have to have tools and skills most people do not have. He shows cutting and drilling sheet steel into complicated shapes which would require significant precision in order to have a functioning gun which did not blow up when it was fired. And at the end of a process which would take days for a skilled person you would have a gun w/o a rifled barrel (as far as I could tell) which means that it would be far less accurate and useful than even the short barrel would suggest. Also, the barrel stock appeared to be a lot thinner than normal which would make the gun more dangerous to use. I was at the shooting range and another shooter was there who showed the barrel of a gun which had been expanded by having 1 bullet stick during rapid-fire shooting at targets so the next bullet hit it. Only the heft of the barrel prevented it from exploding and risking the shooter.

If we imagine that there is anyone at all interesting in making such a gun the total gun supply would be negligable and we would not have a problem.

yrs,
rubato

[Guinevere]

Spare me the holier than thou crap Miles -- you weren't in that room any more than anyone else on this board. FWIW, I've been dreaming/nightmaring about those little faces in the class room ---- faces that look exactly like my 6-year-old-first-grader-nephew, who lives two towns over from Newtown and whose school was in lockdown on Friday -- for the past two nights. I'm sickened and heartsick and devastated that my boys have to learn about such horror at such a young age.

And I don't thump my chest. Had you bothered to read the thread, I've posted the beginnings of some ideas -- ideas that Lord Jim -- on the opposite side of the political aisle from me -- even thinks might be workable. This is how ideas are born and how change is made -- not by telling people it won't work or it can't happen.

[Lord Jim]

My daughter's school had their Christmas Concert yesterday....

They dedicated it to the memory of the children at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and then we had a moment of silent prayer...

It was impossible, especially when the littlest ones, the kindergarteners and first graders, were out doing their bit...not to think about the hell that has been visited on Newtown....

I'm not much for crying, (I haven't cried since my mother passed away; that's been 16 years now) but I started tearing up...so did Kelly, and I looked around the auditorium, and we weren't the only ones....

As the President eloquently put it, it is impossible for any parent not to be deeply moved and affected by this....

I'm thankful that Jimmy and his little cousin are too young to have to explain this to...

Tati has been following it, and unfortunately this is not the first time I've had to talk with her about something like this....I tell her there are evil and sick people in the world who do evil and sick things, and that we will never be able to completely understand it...

This time she asked, "But how can somebody be that evil and sick?"

I didn't have an answer and told her so.

She's in the school choir, and tonight they have a concert...Next week, as we do every year, we're going downtown to see A Christmas Carol, and then spend the evening checking out the lights and decorations in hotels and stores....

We're also going to drive around checking out some of the out door home displays....and there's still shopping left to do....life goes on....

But for us (and I'm sure for millions of parents all around the country) this has really thrown a pall over the whole holiday season, as I think about those parents in Newtown who were planning to do similar things and will now spend Christmas burying their children....and how unspeakably horrific that must be.

And how grateful I am that this horror was not visited on us.

[Lord Jim]

My heart also goes out to those members of law enforcement in Connecticut who have been dealing with this. Especially those who first arrived at the school and witnessed the hellish scene in the classroom.

There is no amount of professional training or experience that can possibly prepare a person for something like this. And in many cases, these were the children of friends and neighbors. Those folks are going to need help too.

[Joe Guy]

.....This is how ideas are born and how change is made -- not by telling people it won't work or it can't happen.

I'd like to hear a workable solution. Not just an idea that someone thinks might work if only everyone would agree with it.

What is a realistic solution that both sides of the debate would agree on?

[Miles]

I never claimed to be in that room and I am not trying to be holier than thou. My personal experiences have, I will admit, perjudice my thinking and help in forming my opinions. Anger is frustration turned inward and there is plenty of that to go around right now. Both can be productive in the healing process. They can also be useful in the thought processes that find solutions to problem as long as they can be tempered with common sense. I am not a fatalist in fact I am a very optimistic person. That being said I am also a realist who understands the seriousness of effecting change in such a volitile issue as gun control.

I am also a parent and grandparent who has had the unfortunate exposure to horrendous death and destruction on a first hand basis. Both dealing with adults and children of all ages and life experiences. This current situation dredges up memories and feelings that remind me of the degenerage level some individuals can reach to commit such devestation.

I do not participate in personal attacks as a way of proving a point or trying to destroy the ideas of others. If my manner finds offence with some perhaps it is me or on the other hand.............................

[Lord Jim]

I'd like to hear a workable solution. Not just an idea that someone thinks might work if only everyone would agree with it.

Nobody's been paying attention, (because so many here would rather focus on fantasies like repealing The 2nd Amendment) but I've been trying to do that Joe.

It is completely realistic to think that we can get a ban on these outrageously large ammo magazines. There has been widespread public support for this for some time.

This is really where the focus ought to be, because it's doable, and it will save lives.

Anti-Second Amendment posturing is not only pointless; it's worse than pointless, it's counter productive....

All that sort of thing does is raise the hackles of the other side, and galvanize opposition. (And it plays right into the hands of the NRA leadership, because if the issue is defined that way, nothing will happen, which suits them just fine.)

People who want to make law abiding, responsible citizens who own firearms the issue, will only succeed in gaining the opposition of law abiding responsible citizens who own firearms...This will accomplish absolutely NOTHING...

Earth to the "fuck the Second Amendment" crowd:

Take a look at the amendment process...Take a look at the polls supporting The Second Amendment....

Repealing The Second Amendment ain't gonna happen, no way, no how, never....it's not on....

So rather than huffing and puffing about things that are never going to happen, wouldn't it be much better to focus on doing things that can be done, will help save lives, and would enjoy broad support across the political spectrum, among both Second Amendment opponents and Second Amendment supporters?

Something like banning these outrageous magazines. It's not "sexy" it's not dramatic, but it has the virtue of being something that can actually be accomplished, that will indisputably save lives.

[Joe Guy]

You're right, Jim.

We need to focus on what can actually be accomplished. But people at a time like this tend to place the blame on the 2nd amendment and all gun owners. It's not productive and as you wrote, repealing the 2nd amendment ain't gonna happen.

[Guinevere]

With respect to you Miles, fuck the constitution!

I would ask anyone who is willing to bang on about their"right to bear arms" to think of those dead children and ask themselves if it's really worth it?

Certainly, fuck the second amendment.

No constitutional right is inviolate. There are reasons behind and established analyses for determining if specific restrictions on liberties pass constitutional muster.

We have modern capable well armed and equipped police forces, national guardsmen, and military, so there is far less of a need for people to have arms to protect themselves (and yes, I know not every community is Fairfield County, and what if we have to protect ourselves from the police/national guard/military -- but those are different issues for the moment). There is also far less of a need for people to have weapons that fire so many rounds so quickly. It wouldn't stop this shooter, but maybe it would have allowed a group of teachers to bring him down, and it certainly would have slowed him down so maybe fewer lives would have been lost.

We like to toss about that beautiful phrase from the Declaration about our unalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Life comes first, and with good reason. I'm more than ok with restricting second amendment rights to protect lives.

Yes, I said "fuck the second amendment" but not one person here -- myself included -- said *anything* about repealing the second amendment or banning all private ownership of guns. The pro-gun people need to stop pretending the second amendment is inviolate. It is not. We limit rights and liberties every day and we have a process to analyze whether those restrictions violate our Constitution.

I've said it at least three times in this thread, I'll say it again: no civilian needs automatic or semi-automatic weapons and the access to them should be severely limited.

I'd also sign on to LJ's idea about limiting magazine size as well.

There is NO perfect solution. There never will be, when you're talking about balancing rights and liberties by restrictions, in favor of public safety. But that doesn't mean we don't even talk about it, or that we don't try. The beauty of laws and regulations is that they can be changed and amended to reflect what works and what does not work. But we have to start somewhere.

[Lord Jim]

I would love to see someone, (Dave perhaps) join this discussion and try to make the case for why anyone has a legitimate need for a magazine with 30, 40, 50, a hundred rounds in it....

Unless you believe that the government is suddenly and without legitimate cause going to descend on your home in battalion strength, (and if you believe that you probably should be denied the right to own a gun on mental illness grounds....I know an electrician in Vermont you can bunk in with...) there is absolutely no legitimate justification for it.

And even in that situation, a 100 round magazine, or even multiple 100 round magazines, won't protect you....(See Koresh, David...the government has tanks, planes, missiles...if they're determined to get you, you're going to get got....you can't "hold out"...no matter how much ammunition you have, trust me on this; the government has more)

Home invasion scenarios typically involve 1, 2, or 3 people....

A weapon with a clip that fires eight bullets should certainly be adequate...(if you just shoot the first one, the others aren't going to wait around counting shots...)

(If you're worried that you're not a good shot, get yourself a high caliber weapon with serious "stopping power"...)

And if you can't take down a deer with eight bullets, you shouldn't be hunting....

I really believe that this is something that reasonable people, including strong "right to keep and bear arms" types, (of which I consider myself to be one) can agree on.

[liberty]

You're right, Jim.

We need to focus on what can actually be accomplished. But people at a time like this tend to place the blame on the 2nd amendment and all gun owners. It's not productive and as you wrote, repealing the 2nd amendment ain't gonna happen.

There would be nothing unconstitutional; about limiting size ammo clip unless the intent is to make the gun inoperable.

Also limiting the right to buy and sell firearms to license dealers would be constitutional unless the intent is to make guns unavailable.

Also gun ownership could be restricted to members of the unorganized civilian militia which would require members to follow the rules of the organization established by their elected militia representatives in convention in order to maintain their membership. That would be constitutional as long as the intent was not to deny constitutional rights, but it probably result in the end individual gun ownership; many people don’t like to follow rules.

[rubato]

A slightly different spin:

(emphasis mine)
_______________________________
http://notes.kateva.org/2012/12/tax-bul ... ental.html

Saturday, December 15, 2012
Tax bullets to pay for better mental health care

We tax cigarettes to offset some of the social costs of tobacco use. This is type of Pigovian Tax.

We could tax bullets to offset the direct costs of America's weapons glut, but it's hard to make up for murder.

Better to prevent the murders.

So tax bullets to pay for better mental health care.

All psychiatrists, social workers and primary care physicians know what a train wreck American psychiatry mental health care is. Rich state, poor state, it's a train wreck everywhere. Families don't know what to do for impaired loved ones - because, often, there's nothing available.

There are many things that could be done. We lack will, and we lack money.

The money problem is easy to solve.

_______________________________


He is right. We tax cigarettes to recover some of the costs of smoking to society and to pay for public-education campaigns which have effectively reduced smoking by a lot. We should do the same for guns.


yrs,
rubato