The Gun Control Debate

[Ban Hammer 13,206]

It'd probably be a good idea if the legal sale of firearms were limited to REAL gun shops. Not pawn shops and certainly not discount stores.

Silly mommy who thinks she might need the gun she never plans to fire might never get the idea if she didn't casually pass through the hunting section in WalMart and spot the rifles.

Actually pawn shops and discount stores have the same licensing requirements as a "real gun shop", at least in my state. Individual-to-individual transfers that don't require any dealer license.

I doubt very much that most people get the idea to buy guns just because they happen to see them in WalMart. That's a bit of a stretch.

They might have the same licensing requirements, but if we want people to be more 'educated' then they should be required to make a purchase from someone trained to educate them. Make sense?

I wouldn't put it past people to decide about the final purchase of a weapon based on a whim. People spend larger amounts of money on whims. Don't underestimate the stupidity of the American consumer.

training and education is available, all one has to do is ask. i'd teach my neighbors if they asked. many gun owners are more than happy to share their knowledge. and there are often certified courses available too (although they charge for the course).

however, requiring the gun seller to teach the buyer about the product makes about as much sense as a car dealership being required to teach driving classes, so let's not go there.

[garya505 2]

It'd probably be a good idea if the legal sale of firearms were limited to REAL gun shops. Not pawn shops and certainly not discount stores.

Silly mommy who thinks she might need the gun she never plans to fire might never get the idea if she didn't casually pass through the hunting section in WalMart and spot the rifles.

Actually pawn shops and discount stores have the same licensing requirements as a "real gun shop", at least in my state. Individual-to-individual transfers that don't require any dealer license.

I doubt very much that most people get the idea to buy guns just because they happen to see them in WalMart. That's a bit of a stretch.

They might have the same licensing requirements, but if we want people to be more 'educated' then they should be required to make a purchase from someone trained to educate them. Make sense?

I wouldn't put it past people to decide about the final purchase of a weapon based on a whim. People spend larger amounts of money on whims. Don't underestimate the stupidity of the American consumer.

In my experience, few of the gun shops I have been to provide education in the proper and legal use of firearms, though I suppose that could vary around the country.

Usually that's done by firing ranges and places like that. Most of my instruction was by a police veteran at a local community college. I did find out about it from a friend who was a manager of a gun shop.

Despite the stupidity of the American consumer (which I agree on, BTW) most people still know that a firearm is more dangerous than an IPod, and the decision to buy one invloves a lot more consideration.

[Peikko 1,575]

Didn't someone already suggest that the acquisition of a gun licence should include some practical demonstration of gun knowledge? While it wouldn't prevent the mass murder scenario it would probably reduce accidental shootings.

[garya505 2]

Hey, let's not stop the emotion and hysteria. If this gets reduced to logic, reason, and common sense it takes all the fun out of the debate!

[rebeccajo 14]

Didn't someone already suggest that the acquisition of a gun licence should include some practical demonstration of gun knowledge? While it wouldn't prevent the mass murder scenario it would probably reduce accidental shootings.

It might help the mass murder scenario.

I don't want to imply that, if, say gun shop owners were required to give some training before a purchase, that they should be required to make a psychological evaluation of someone.

BUT - I've worked with the public for over 30 years in one capacity or another. After about a five minute conversation with someone, I can pretty much suss out if they have any comprehension of what we are really talking about (ie - are you really qualified to handle a weapon). And I usually have a pretty good idea if they are a whack job too.

Practically speaking, I wouldn't expect the legal seller of firearms to be able to legally deny the sale of a weapon to someone based on the 'whackjob' litmus test. But they could be empowered to get ahold of local health department authority, or mental health provider, for immediate follow up.

Edited February 18, 2008 by rebeccajo

[britty 1]

I think you need some Venn diagrams Charles in order to understand the concept. However, the point, which seems to elude you, is that to believe all mass gun killers are people that are living on the edge of society and acquire guns illegally and have no education in guns is quite simply a false notion.

But responsible, law abiding people, simply do not decide to go on a killing rampage. I assume you are saying that gun killers can be normal members of the community without criminal records and in relatively good standing. There HAS to be something terribly wrong with ANY individual who chooses to murder people randomly. They could never be included under the umbrella of "normal" for the mere fact they are psychos with an intent to kill.

[Ban Hammer 13,206]

Didn't someone already suggest that the acquisition of a gun licence should include some practical demonstration of gun knowledge? While it wouldn't prevent the mass murder scenario it would probably reduce accidental shootings.

i can only speak regarding texas and kansas, but buying a firearm does not require practical demonstration of gun knowledge. it does apply however when going thru the cch course.

in a similar vein, i don't know how to weld. that's why i don't own a welder. but if i did have the interest in owning one, i'd learn about it before i bought one. but that's just me......

I think you need some Venn diagrams Charles in order to understand the concept. However, the point, which seems to elude you, is that to believe all mass gun killers are people that are living on the edge of society and acquire guns illegally and have no education in guns is quite simply a false notion.

But responsible, law abiding people, simply do not decide to go on a killing rampage. I assume you are saying that gun killers can be normal members of the community without criminal records and in relatively good standing. There HAS to be something terribly wrong with ANY individual who chooses to murder people randomly. They could never be included under the umbrella of "normal" for the mere fact they are psychos with an intent to kill.

and given the recent shootings at these colleges, the signs were there that these individuals were unbalanced.

[SteveLaura 0]

I will go out on a limb and say that people who gun down innocent strangers want to die. Why they wish to take several people with them is unknowable. It could 'simply' be mental illness, but there may also be a desire for some kind of noteriety, general anger, a disconnect due to violent video games, etc... Arming students isn't going to be a deterrant as these people already know that they're not coming out alive. How many turn the guns on themselves afterwards anyway?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I will go out on a limb and say that people who gun down innocent strangers want to die. Why they wish to take several people with them is unknowable. It could 'simply' be mental illness, but there may also be a desire for some kind of noteriety, general anger, a disconnect due to violent video games, etc... Arming students isn't going to be a deterrant as these people already know that they're not coming out alive. How many turn the guns on themselves afterwards anyway?

That's true. Someone asked earlier if the perp didn't have access to firearms would he go on a similar rampage with some other weapon. I have to say, I doubt it - given the suicide component that seems to be pretty consistent with the phenomenon.

At a guess - I'd say that without a gun, the perp would probably just off himself.

[SteveLaura 0]

I will go out on a limb and say that people who gun down innocent strangers want to die. Why they wish to take several people with them is unknowable. It could 'simply' be mental illness, but there may also be a desire for some kind of noteriety, general anger, a disconnect due to violent video games, etc... Arming students isn't going to be a deterrant as these people already know that they're not coming out alive. How many turn the guns on themselves afterwards anyway?

That's true. Someone asked earlier if the perp didn't have access to firearms would he go on a similar rampage with some other weapon. I have to say, I doubt it - given the suicide component that seems to be pretty consistent with the phenomenon.

At a guess - I'd say that without a gun, the perp would probably just off himself.

Conjecture, obviously, but that's my take too, for what it's worth.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I will go out on a limb and say that people who gun down innocent strangers want to die. Why they wish to take several people with them is unknowable. It could 'simply' be mental illness, but there may also be a desire for some kind of noteriety, general anger, a disconnect due to violent video games, etc... Arming students isn't going to be a deterrant as these people already know that they're not coming out alive. How many turn the guns on themselves afterwards anyway?

That's true. Someone asked earlier if the perp didn't have access to firearms would he go on a similar rampage with some other weapon. I have to say, I doubt it - given the suicide component that seems to be pretty consistent with the phenomenon.

At a guess - I'd say that without a gun, the perp would probably just off himself.

Conjecture, obviously, but that's my take too, for what it's worth.

True. Without knowing what's going on in the guy's mind you can't say for sure - but its a fair guess.

Edited February 18, 2008 by Number 6

[Peikko 1,575]

I think you need some Venn diagrams Charles in order to understand the concept. However, the point, which seems to elude you, is that to believe all mass gun killers are people that are living on the edge of society and acquire guns illegally and have no education in guns is quite simply a false notion.

But responsible, law abiding people, simply do not decide to go on a killing rampage. I assume you are saying that gun killers can be normal members of the community without criminal records and in relatively good standing. There HAS to be something terribly wrong with ANY individual who chooses to murder people randomly. They could never be included under the umbrella of "normal" for the mere fact they are psychos with an intent to kill.

I didn't make any mention of normal or abnormal. I was merely pointing out that these killers have come in all shapes and sizes and some have even been members of gun clubs and many maybe even most have legally acquired their weapons. Therefore just because one has a gun license and owns guns there is no guarentee that one is in fact a normal, responsible member of society. The most common denominator seems to be that this is a male phenomenan.

[Peikko 1,575]

The suggestion that a license should have a practical knowledge of guns componant makes sense even if it isn't common practice at the moment.

[PlatyPius 5]

I will go out on a limb and say that people who gun down innocent strangers want to die. Why they wish to take several people with them is unknowable. It could 'simply' be mental illness, but there may also be a desire for some kind of noteriety, general anger, a disconnect due to violent video games, etc... Arming students isn't going to be a deterrant as these people already know that they're not coming out alive. How many turn the guns on themselves afterwards anyway?

That's true. Someone asked earlier if the perp didn't have access to firearms would he go on a similar rampage with some other weapon. I have to say, I doubt it - given the suicide component that seems to be pretty consistent with the phenomenon.

At a guess - I'd say that without a gun, the perp would probably just off himself.

Conjecture, obviously, but that's my take too, for what it's worth.

True. Without knowing what's going on in the guy's mind you can't say for sure - but its a fair guess.

Sounds more like a suicide bomber to me....

Which are much more common than Americans going on a school shooting spree.

[garya505 2]

I will go out on a limb and say that people who gun down innocent strangers want to die. Why they wish to take several people with them is unknowable. It could 'simply' be mental illness, but there may also be a desire for some kind of noteriety, general anger, a disconnect due to violent video games, etc... Arming students isn't going to be a deterrant as these people already know that they're not coming out alive. How many turn the guns on themselves afterwards anyway?

They want to be famous, or they're getting some sort of revenge on the people they kill because of some perceived wrong they've done to the murderer. Or, they think their victims are the devil.