Oregon mall shooting leaves 3 dead, including shooter

[SMOKE 1,426]

Or, just don't leave firearms laying around where anybody could walk away with them. There is a good case for negligence.

no there isn't

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

To start with a limit on the amount of guns one person can own, the caliber of those weapons and a ban on any automatic or semi automatic weapons. Also start a major gun buy back program for all illegal guns and also those owned legally but now not legal to have because of the new laws. Increase the mandatory jail time for anyone caught with an illegal gun from one year to ten years.

The gun buy back sounds fine, but why would you limit the amount of guns people can own? I don't see the point in that. BTW it's illegal to murder someone, and the punishment is usually death or life in prison yet it doesn't seem to hinder all those thugs in the inner cities. I don't see where making stricter laws on top of the ones already in place are going to make a difference.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

What it says is that the type of gun control that's currently in place isn't working. Part of that reason is because it's so much easier to cross state lines and get these guns legally or ilegally, and then go back to the inner city and sell them on the street. What we need in place is nationwide gun laws, not state by state.

It's really simple to understand.

and in 21st century the citizen should not own a gun but only a law enforcement and military should own the gun?

Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive

I am sure ppl will still continue gun control is productive and thats the way to go.

That's a shoddy piece of research right there. No control for any other factors. And you really want to pretend that Russia is a peer of the US?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

It's really simple to understand.

Explain it to all of us who aren't that simple.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

no there isn't

http://www.saf.org/journal/14/lock,stockandbarrel.pdf

[Harsh_77 718]

Or, just don't leave firearms laying around where anybody could walk away with them. There is a good case for negligence.

How do you know where the friend had gun.... should we call tin foil? lol

[Harsh_77 718]

It's really simple to understand.

That's a shoddy piece of research right there. No control for any other factors. And you really want to pretend that Russia is a peer of the US?

If a research agree with your viewpoint its top notch now a work done by Harvard does not align with your view point its shoddy....lol

Oh on this one you could not even argue as posted on FOX as it was link from ACLU.

Edited December 12, 2012 by Harsh_77

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

How do you know where the friend had gun.... should we call tin foil? lol

Somebody did allegedly walk away with it. Logic is not your friend.

[SMOKE 1,426]

http://www.saf.org/journal/14/lock,stockandbarrel.pdf

what part of 'he stole it' are you having problems understanding?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

what part of 'he stole it' are you having problems understanding?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

gun-nuttery.com

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Explain it to all of us who aren't that simple.

Are dry counties really dry? Or do people just head across the county line to fill up and get their booze? The latter, right? Same with guns. If I can't get them in my jurisdiction but they are readily and easily available in other jurisdictions, then short of controls at the jurisdiction's border they will find their way into the jurisdiction where they are prohibited. In other words, as long as firearms are easily available anywhere in the US, they will be easily available everywhere in the US.

[Teddy B 17,252]

The gun buy back sounds fine, but why would you limit the amount of guns people can own? I don't see the point in that. BTW it's illegal to murder someone, and the punishment is usually death or life in prison yet it doesn't seem to hinder all those thugs in the inner cities. I don't see where making stricter laws on top of the ones already in place are going to make a difference.

Limiting the amount of guns a person can own, means less access to guns for all, that cuts down the access to nuts that go on these killing sprees. Limiting the calibers and removing automatic abnd semi automatic weapons, cuts down on the amount of damage that can be done if one of these nuts does manage to get their hands on a gun. Raising the sentence from 1 to 10 years will make everyone think twice about posessing an illegal gun, including the dealers that sell them. There will always be people that scoff at the laws in place and break them anyway, this is not a cure all, it's a way to cut down on the number of firearm related deaths.

[decocker 7,198]

Edited December 12, 2012 by val erie

[SMOKE 1,426]

Are dry counties really dry? Or do people just head across the county line to fill up and get their booze? The latter, right? Same with guns. If I can't get them in my jurisdiction but they are readily and easily available in other jurisdictions, then short of controls at the jurisdiction's border they will find their way into the jurisdiction where they are prohibited. In other words, as long as firearms are easily available anywhere in the US, they will be easily available everywhere in the US.

so we should ban cars?