Could changes in gun policy prevent another massacre?

  • Article by: ISAAC WOLF , Scripps Howard News Service
  • Updated: December 16, 2012 - 11:41 PM
  • 84
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
bej1bej1Dec. 16, 12 9:56 PM

Perhaps it is time for repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Repeal would not outlaw guns, but it would allow sensible regulation of guns. For while it may be true, as the NRA says, that "Guns do not kill people, people kill people", it is equally true that guns make it very very easy for people to kill people.

27
58
hobie2Dec. 16, 1210:27 PM

He used a common caliber and a common one-shot-per-trigger-pull rifle - at close range no faster than a lever action or many bolt actions - and he broke through a security door to get into the school. You would have to ban all rifles and ammo - and confiscate all rifles and ammo - to have maybe stopped him... However - if the censors let this be an open discussion and the censors don't go PC nuts on the suggestion - you do realize that logically, the most likely deterrent that would have stopped this was if the principal or real security person had had a hand gun and knew how and was willing to use it. Realistically, banning ammo and weapons would not have made a difference.

48
28
Earlybird39Dec. 16, 1210:47 PM

The bottom line is that we have been doing it the way the NRA has dictated we do it for several decades now. How's that working for us? We need to make some changes and I would start with not allowing people to sell their guns to anyone without a background check (no more selling to Joe Schmoe on the internet) and if someone is listed on the no-fly list he should also not be able to buy a gun. Also, unify laws so people can't easily pick up a semi-automatic in one state and then transport and use it in a state that has stricter laws. And gosh, people might have to revert to hunting game without semi-automatics. Bummer. People need to be willing to undergo more inconvenience in exchange for saving lives.

23
36
minn12Dec. 16, 1211:02 PM

More nonsense from the gun-haters. Do what Israel does -arm teachers and school volunteers. You don't see any mass school shootings there. The anti-gun crowd will never admit what is so obvious: these mass shootings always occur in 'gun free zones', where, thanks to the liberal gun-haters, guns are banned. This allows the evil perpetrators to accomplish their deadly mission with no fear of resistance. The only way to stop this from happening is to have lots of armed security at all schools, or allow licensed and trained teachers and administrators to carry concealed. Once word of that got out, these school shootings would come to a screeching halt.

37
24
bootsy07Dec. 16, 1211:06 PM

My reading of the account was that he did in fact use an automatic rifle. It is flat out time for a ban on high capacity firepower and reasonable background checks for procurement. Ask yourself just one question, if it prevents one and only one Newtown in the next 20 years, wouldn't that be worth it?

22
43
turgidDec. 16, 1211:16 PM

The onus should be on gun rights activists to demonstrate their need for assault weapons to defend themselves. That should be the only criteria. Everything else is just posturing.

17
32
officertruthDec. 16, 1211:17 PM

Grant Duwe, a criminologist with the Minnesota Department of Corrections who has written a history of mass murders in America, said that while mass shootings rose between the 1960s and the 1990s, they actually dropped in the 2000s. And mass killings actually reached their peak in 1929, according to his data. He estimates that there were 32 in the 1980s, 42 in the 1990s and 26 in the first decade of the century.

29
4
jpnIIIDec. 16, 1211:19 PM

I own a 12-gauge shotgun, given to me by my grandfather when I was 16. And I went hunting (ducks, geese, grouse) numerous times with my father when I was much younger. I took a gun safety course (it was required in MN in the 1970's, and I imagine still is) when I was 12 years old. I don't have anything against guns, per se. And there have always been, and always will be, sick/depressed/angry people in this world, who do not think or act necessarily in a sane, thoughtful way. And I don't think we necessarily need to repeal the 2nd amendment, either. People do have the right to defend themselves. I like having my 12-gauge not for self-defense (I don't have any shells, at the moment), but simply because it was given to me by my grandfather. I recall reading sometime within the last year or two that there are more than 200 million guns in the U.S. If guns were made illegal tomorrow, across the board, it might very well not prevent a repeat of the Friday tragedy in CN. No amount of legislation can prevent certain people from getting their hands on a firearm, and going off to shoot whomever. That cat is long, long out of the bag, so to speak. All this said, I AM in favor of at least *trying* to make it more difficult to obtain a gun legally. And to limit how many cartridges can be loaded into an ammunition clip, etc. If one has to wait several days before their gun arrives with more stringent checks, so be it. Law-abiding citizens will still be able to get their hands on firearms. I can still go hunting, if I wish. I am NOT talking about taking people's guns away. And I am not thinking about this legislation as being the first step down some "slippery slope" toward taking people's guns away, either. And yes -- criminals will still be able to get their hands on whatever firearm they want-- see my comment above about the cat being out of the bag. However, in my view, if additional legislation can prevent EVEN ONE person, ANYTIME, from performing the type of heinous act we witnessed on Friday (because they can't easily get their hands on whatever weapon(s) they intend to use), then it is good legislation. Thank you.

29
13
sharkysharkDec. 16, 1211:24 PM

Gun control could not stop something like what happened on Friday. It was a well-planned terrorist attack. Even without guns, he could have bought what he needed to make a deadly IED at a grocery or hardware store. The plans are on the internet.

29
16
riley44Dec. 16, 1211:40 PM

People that think if more people carried guns around, then massacres like this might be prevented are delusional. The number of innocent people killed by guns far out numbers the number of criminals stopped by people defending themselves using a gun. And the more guns around, the easier it is for a criminal or crazy person to access a gun. We need to make high capacity magazines illegal, assault weapons illegal,and armor piercing or extra lethal bullets illegal. The rights of victims of gun violence surely out weighs the rights of gun nuts to carry extra lethal weapons. I hunt, so I'm not against guns per se. But many of the people that buy guns for self protection are a bit paranoid to begin with, and are as likely to shoot their grand daughter on the porch as defend against an armed criminal. There is especially no reason for a normal person to own an assault type rifle or extra lethal ammo.

25
29

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT