You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
Every single firearm owner, beginning with gun manufacturers, needs to be licensed and insured for liability.
Allow the insurance industry and their actuaries to determine the risk and premiums for gun ownership.
Like vehicle liability insurance, premiums will certainly assess the relative risk posed by individuals.
Grover Norquist does not like taxpayers being forced to pay for carnage done by shooters.
Just one of these events can result in millions of dollars of costs including emergency hospital treatment, long term disabilities, loss of livelihood, and burial costs- just to name the direct costs.
We citizens have the right to resist these costs being placed on taxpayers unless and until the gun industry protects innocents from the resulting costs of the use of their products.
The only way to expect any accountability from the merchants of deadly instruments is through their pocketbook.
Right now, they pass all those costs on to the innocent taxpayer, while they enjoy more liability protection than the very emergency room doctor who treats the gun victims.
There is no logical argument against such reasonable and necessary measures.
The truly pathetic congress passing off responsibility- it's duty, really- to a comission. Just like the deficit. They cannot get any sadder, any more abjectly ineffectual.
Will this make Michael Bloomberg the next President? Or is he too successful to be elected...
Good Luck With That Guys. As long as the NRA attends Grover's weekly meetings and has a stranglehold on Congress nothing's going to get through. The only way I can think of is for the Commander in Chief and his four generals (the organizers of the grassroots campaign) muster enough strength from the populace to get a constitutional amendment going. As far as I'm concerned every shooting leaves blood on the hands of those who voted to allow assault rifles and automatic hand guns.
Because there is no single way to end this madness, our politicians end up doing nothing when they could take many steps to minimize future situations. A minimum of 3 month waiting period to purchase a firearm with significant background checks required. Ban all assault style weapons. Implement much tougher and madatory laws regarding the possession of firearms (if you are not the licensed person to own it's madatory5-10 years in prison), ban violent video games, tougher stance on violent movies and hours they can be available to view (not prime time),requiring firearm owners to renew permit for ownership every year, tougher laws and madatory prison for possession of an illegal firearm (no more hand slapping, probation), repeal the conceal and carry laws, laws (with teeth)as it relates to legal owners of guns having specific accountability (i.e.keeping guns under lock at key when not in use). None of these measures by itself will prevent but combined it can minimize.
Getting in a reason to remove guns from responsible people because of the irresponsible acts of one unbalanced person can only be construed as political. To politicize a horrible tragedy like this so quickly after it happened is tasteless and in poor form at the very least, to me it's heartless and self serving. Trying to control nuts with guns is like trying to eliminate drug abuse, it's a never ending problem. It's almost moot. The problem here to me is more about how he was able to access the children. When children are at school, their safety is a liability of the school, for all circumstances. Bulletproof, reinforced glass would have prevented this guy from entering the school. Better security to protect the most defenseless seems more paramount to me then attempting to score political points and push a Bill through a congressional gridlock. We should fix the problems we can, not try to fix problems we know we can't. If you really want to make guns safer, require that they have an electronic trigger that becomes disabled in locations that it shouldn't be ever used.
NRA - thank you SO much for all of us, and any of us, being able to buy automatic and semi-automatic weapons. Along with being able to buy ammunition that is designed for maximum destruction. We should all feel so much better that we all have the right to bear arms....any arms, legal or illegal. have a great day in feeling the strength of your lobbyists. Should make you proud.
reasonable2: What good would insurance do in this case? The owner was murdered and the guns stolen. The shooter tried to buy a gun a few day earlier and was denied. Also the press keeps calling the gun used as an assault rifle, it was not an assault rifle. Assault rifles have been banned in the US since 1934. What he used was a civilian look alike of a Military assault rifle. Bushmaster makes several civilian look alikes designed for everything from target shooting to hunting. They are a high priced firearm with the starting price around 1500 dollars to over 3000 dollars. The 1500 dollar models come without sights, so anyone buying a basic model has to spend several hundred dollars more to make it usable. Most nations do not use the term “assault weapon” to classify civilian weaponry. In the United States, the term was rarely used before gun control political efforts emerged in the 1980. Definition of Assault Rifle: Military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire. Light and portable, yet able to deliver a high volume of fire with reasonable accuracy at modern combat ranges of 1,000–1,600 ft (300–500 m), assault rifles have become the standard infantry weapon of modern armies. Their ease of handling makes them ideal for mobile assault troops crowded into personnel carriers or helicopters, as well as for guerrilla fighters engaged in jungle or urban warfare. Widely used assault rifles are the U.S. M16, the Soviet Kalashnikov (the AK-47 and modernized versions), the Belgian FAL and FNC, and the German G3.
He would have found another way; unlike Perkins & Belcher, where the firearm was HANDY in a fit of rage, this was planned. And I support RATIONAL REGULATION of firearms; still, Lanza tried to buy, was turned down, and used his first victim's guns. No easy answers; mental health should be a focus, FIRST.
But why is the ever vocal NRA silent I wonder?
Just look what strict gun controls have done for our neighbor to the south, Mexico, where citizens are beheaded and lined up in front of firing squads by the drug cartels. Studies have shown that the majority of those involved in mass shootings are on some type of FDA approved antidepressent. Is any one going after the billion dollar pharmaceutical industry. No doubt if you removed every weapon from the country individuals intent on evil will find other ways to carry out their goals.
Maybe this national commission will ask why we leave school children to be sitting ducks for these madmen? If the school had adults trained to return fire so they could protect the children, might there be more alive today?
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks