Mass Shooting at Elementary School Connecticut 12/14/12

[Knebby]

this is such a huge problem. i guess some of you ( U.S. citizens ) resent outsiders such as myself, knebby, ledded1, reggie making comments here.

but truly, from our position, we ( don't mean to speak for those just mentioned ) are just appalled by your culture and attitude about guns/violence.

i CANNOT imagine entertaining the thought that there need to be police in the schools! you say they are already there because of drugs/violence? wow, really?

just think of all those billions of dollars being spent on this, and NOT being spent on mental health/heath/education/housing etc etc etc

texas melanie seems to be the only one living in it that can see the woods from the trees. she has kids in school, and can still see the answer is NOT more guns.

a previous poster ( who i love and respect ) was angry at us for trying to help. i hope nobody jumps on me for saying this, we truly are wanting to help. heck, the U.S. is an amazing place in so many ways - world leaders in so many great things. learn from this and don't continue to be world leaders in this type of tragedy.

again, please don't see this as me preaching, i don't mean to be like that. it's hard to put into words ......

Well done for trying. xx

[slave to zep]

Hello STZ, Who are you referring to about resenting outsiders opinions? I don't think anyone said any such thing....

Speaking for myself, I even complimented Reggie. As an "outsider" he makes perfect sense to me.

And you said it right dear, you can't IMAGINE the idea of police in schools or elsewhere. That's because you DON'T live here. But it's not as you imagine it, or can't imagine it -that they are there "expecting" trouble and they represent "fear" to average, everyday people. It's normal to go into a store or someplace and see an officer at the entrance/exit or walking around. It's their job to be there if the man-power allows it to be. They are in most Banks as you should imagine, and in other public places where if there is an issue, they are not far out of reach-but already on the scene. It's not like the book/movie 1984, if that's what your vision is. There is no sense of threat because they are present, unless you have a fear of cops or a problem with them to being with.

And what do you mean by someone saying they want more guns? Are you talking about police officers? Officers with guns provide protection...not more of a threat. (except to the intruder)

i wasn't referring to you, rock historian.

we have a few security guards in our shopping centres, and sometimes at bank fron doors, but not always. they are not police, though.

by saying that you want more police presence, is saying you want more guns, not less.

[DavidZoso]

Guns don't kill people....People kill people.

Yes there are evil people-always have been- Hitler etc but the guns are not the problem.

There have been 6 mass killings at school's in China alone since 2010.

6 people dead and 91 injured- no guns were used- knives were used. It is the lunatics that are the problem not what they use. This recent guy if he was so upset with his life- then kill himself but not his mom and those kids.

[Rock Historian]

And yet this reads EXACTLY like somebody resenting the input of "outsiders".

Can't you just take it that people just want to stop people DYING - wherever they live?

Oh God, here we go.......And you wonder why I don't bother with you any longer.......

If you CARE to read my dear, go see what I wrote Reggie a few post above.

I COMPLIMENTD HIM! So, you are dead wrong.

I'm the last one resenting "outsiders". As a matter of fact some of you that don't live here make more sense on the matter than people who do ( I said that too above) So in this case, do a better job understanding what I say or what you read from someone's post, before you jump the gun as usual on somebody Knebby. An apology would be nice, but I know that's a hard/difficult thing for you to do,when your mind is made up.

[slave to zep]

And yet this reads EXACTLY like somebody resenting the input of "outsiders".

Can't you just take it that people just want to stop people DYING - wherever they live?

thankyou, knebby.

Well done for trying. xx

ditto

[LedZeppfan77]

My point is Rick, when the Constitution was written, the world was a different place with different values, mind-sets and the attitudes and behavior of people in general. No mass murderers running amuck, no gun control issues, no mental health awareness, so on and so on, and most importantly, there was a government being built to function properly. If they could see how it all has turned out, they'd be totally disgusted. Unless you can raise the dead, there is no changing/adjusting the Laws of the Constitution, from what I'm aware of, unfortunately

I certainly am aware. They were on horseback and there were no cars. Guns were one shot muzzleloaders mainly. Maybe the old colts or Winchesters were being invented then? I dont know the dates. i know the Winchester 30/30, the rifle of the old west, goes way back. I have fired one and it kicks like a mule. The gun law debates are going to be in full swing again. But there is alot of support for owning a gun vs abolishing the right to own one.

[slave to zep]

Oh God, here we go.......And you wonder why I don't bother with you any longer.......

If you CARE to read my dear, go see what I wrote Reggie a few post above.

I COMPLIMENTD HIM! So, you are dead wrong.

I'm the last one resenting "outsiders". As a matter of fact some of you that don't live here make more sense on the matter than people who do ( I said that too above) So in this case, do a better job understanding what I say or what you read from someone's post, before you jump the gun as usual on somebody Knebby. An apology would be nice, but I know that's a hard/difficult thing for you to do,when your mind is made up.

oh dear .... knebby was just supporting what i said, i think. keep calm

[Rock Historian]

thankyou, knebby.

ditto

Two "outsiders" as you call yourself, visit the site and BOTH read what I said ENTIRELY WRONG...I said just the opposite above.....Go sell crazy somewhere else.

[Rock Historian]

i wasn't referring to you, rock historian.

we have a few security guards in our shopping centres, and sometimes at bank fron doors, but not always. they are not police, though.

by saying that you want more police presence, is saying you want more guns, not less.

Officers with guns = protection Slave.

[Rock Historian]

oh dear .... knebby was just supporting what i said, i think. keep calm

Yes, and Knebby IS DEAD WRONG...I said the complete opposite to Reggie. So,how can someone possibly, remotely misinterpret that I have a problem with "outsiders" on this topic?????

[Knebby]

Oh God, here we go.......And you wonder why I don't bother with you any longer.......

Good contribution. I was talking about THAT post (which you edited AFTER I posted) and I wasn't wrong.

So no, you won't be getting ANY apology for that. If you stick around though, I was just about to quote one of your other posts. That is if we can keep this to current debate and not bring your other mysterious resentments into it.

[slave to zep]

Two "outsiders" as you call yourself, visit the site and BOTH read what I said ENTIRELY WRONG...I said just the opposite above.....Go sell crazy somewhere else.

hey, hey, hey .... communication breakdown ..... i don't get why you think we are crazy?

i said IT WASN"T you that i was talking about resenting me, calm down mate. we are all friends here.

[LedZeppfan77]

oh dear .... knebby was just supporting what i said, i think. keep calm

Slave to Zep, I like you alot. But you do live in a different world than we do. My guess is its far safer to walk the streets of Sydney at midnight than to venture through Queens or the Bronx. London, is a bit more like it is here. They have had their own problems, with the bombings and all. There is no fast or perfect solution to this nightmare. We know it, Obama knows it.

[Knebby]

Oh please Steve..don't come with that bullshit. Do you even care, "really care" about what we are talking about???

So when IS enough, enough? When it happens to someone YOU know?

Ah I was just about to quote this. You said just what I was thinking. I applaud you.

[slave to zep]

Officers with guns = protection Slave.

yes, but they also = more guns.

[Knebby]

Slave to Zep, I like you alot. But you do live in a different world than we do. My guess is its far safer to walk the streets of Sydney at midnight than to venture through Queens or the Bronx. London, is a bit more like it is here. They have had their own problems, with the bombings and all. There is no fast or perfect solution to this nightmare. We know it, Obama knows it.

What bombings are you speaking of 77?

[Leather Apron]

My point is Rick, when the Constitution was written, the world was a different place with different values, mind-sets and the attitudes and behavior of people in general. No mass murderers running amuck, no gun control issues, no mental health awareness, so on and so on, and most importantly, there was a government being built to function properly.

Is that true? No imperial governments seeking to control entire continents? No forced bondage of millions of worker slaves? Equal rights for women? No forced relocations? No internments?

None of these things were done by just a handful of mentally ill people. These things were done by GOVERNMENTS including this one. Our founding fathers knew that if they gave more power to a central government that there would always be a trend toward abuse of the people. Just look at what the Imperial European nations were doing around the globe.

The 2nd Amendment was necessary then, and it is necessary now. Even if it is only symbolic in some people's minds. What the 2nd Amendment along with the rest of the Bill of Rights insures, is that individuals have rights and powers reserved for them inspite of the natural tendency for government to attempt to legislate or regulate those protections away. I believe that the very FACT that in bothers those in power actually means something.

And here is another question I have regarding these so called "assault rifles". Did that type of rifle make this kid crazy? Or was he already crazy? Do you people actually believe that the same result could not have been accomplished by another kind of hunting rifle? The ONLY thing this rifle could do over many other semi-automatic (which is not the same as a machine gun) was accept a larger capacity magazine. But guess what? Almost any semi-automatic rifle could be illegally retrofited with a large capacity magaine. So then how is banning a rifle that just "looks scary" over another one going to change the equation?

The reason why many people defend this and other legally manufactured and legally owned rifles is because THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS. Because any logical consideration should conclude that the shooter could have done this with just about any other type of gun against 6 year olds. The reason the shooter picked this gun was because he was crazy. It fulfilled something in his mind (probably fueled by violent video games) and that is probably why he used it. But he could have killed 20 or even more small children with a .22 caliber target rifle equipped with a high capacity magazine.

It is time we dealt with the mentally ill people in our culture. But legislating away more guns is not the answer. This was a horrible event, but it almost reminds me of the way the government used the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to justify internment of Japanese Americans. One thing is not always caused by another. Giving up rights for protection has NEVER worked before.

[slave to zep]

Slave to Zep, I like you alot. But you do live in a different world than we do. My guess is its far safer to walk the streets of Sydney at midnight than to venture through Queens or the Bronx. London, is a bit more like it is here. They have had their own problems, with the bombings and all. There is no fast or perfect solution to this nightmare. We know it, Obama knows it.

oh yes, i know that my country is very different, which is why i said i couldn't even imagine living the way you guys do.

yes, there is no easy answer.

[Rock Historian]

Good contribution. I was talking about THAT post (which you edited AFTER I posted) and I wasn't wrong.

So no, you won't be getting ANY apology for that. If you stick around though, I was just about to quote one of your other posts. That is if we can keep this to current debate and not bring your other mysterious resentments into it.

WTF are you talking about???? What did I edit for YOU? Your really a screwed up person......

And I don't expect an apology from you, because it's not in your blood to do so. Which is why your "friend" list became shorter.

[Knebby]

I've said this exact thing in an earlier post. Those "quotes" Steve Jones wants to throw in the mix from Ben Franklin doesn't mean shit these days...Point being-If the people who built this country and wrote the constitution could see how things were run/turning out this day in age, you bet your sweet ass they'd be plenty of changes to the rule book. Trust me.

They are rolling in their graves with disgust.

And this. I am in total agreement.

But I guess you worded your other post badly - because the line I quoted DID look like you saying "You don't live here, you don't know" - which certainly gives an "outsiders aren't welcome" impression. I'm not the only one who thought that.

[Knebby]

WTF are you talking about???? What did I edit for YOU? Your really a screwed up person......

Eh??

I didn't say you edited anything FOR ME - I said you edited it after I posted ( and added the line about Reggie) - I didn't say that had ANYTHING TO DO with ME - I was just saying that I hadn't responded to that as I had already posted before you edited!

You really have something against me.

[Rock Historian]

And this. I am in total agreement.

But I guess you worded your other post badly - because the line I quoted DID look like you saying "You don't live here, you don't know" - which certainly gives an "outsiders aren't welcome" impression. I'm not the only one who thought that.

Yeah, you read it wrong 100%. Why is it that you have to word things like a child for people to understand you here. I thought this site was full of compitent people who could usually make out what someone means, even if it's not quite worded, or in this case -read correctly?

All I meant by that, is just what she stated herself...She can't imagine it, because she doesn't live here...That's a FACT.

[LedZeppfan77]

Is that true? No imperial governments seeking to control entire continents? No forced bondage of millions of worker slaves? Equal rights for women? No forced relocations? No internments?

None of these things were done by just a handful of mentally ill people. These things were done by GOVERNMENTS including this one. Our founding fathers knew that if they gave more power to a central government that there would always be a trend toward abuse of the people. Just look at what the Imperial European nations were doing around the globe.

The 2nd Amendment was necessary then, and it is necessary now. Even if it is only symbolic in some people's minds. What the 2nd Amendment along with the rest of the Bill of Rights insures, is that individuals have rights and powers reserved for them inspite of the natural tendency for government to attempt to legislate or regulate those protections away. I believe that the very FACT that in bothers those in power actually means something.

And here is another question I have regarding these so called "assault rifles". Did that type of rifle make this kid crazy? Or was he already crazy? Do you people actually believe that the same result could not have been accomplished by another kind of hunting rifle? The ONLY thing this rifle could do over many other semi-automatic (which is not the same as a machine gun) was accept a larger capacity magazine. But guess what? Almost any semi-automatic rifle could be illegally retrofited with a large capacity magaine. So then how is banning a rifle that just "looks scary" over another one going to change the equation?

The reason why many people defend this and other legally manufactured and legally owned rifles is because THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO BAN ALL GUNS. Because any logical consideration should conclude that the shooter could have done this with just about any other type of gun against 6 year olds. The reason the shooter picked this gun was because he was crazy. It fulfilled something in his mind (probably fueled by violent video games) and that is probably why he used it. But he could have killed 20 or even more small children with a .22 caliber target rifle equipped with a high capacity magazine.

It is time we dealt with the mentally ill people in our culture. But legislating away more guns is not the answer. This was a horrible event, but it almost reminds me of the way the government used the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to justify internment of Japanese Americans. One thing is not always caused by another. Giving up rights for protection has NEVER worked before.

There has to be a middle ground. No damn way in hell are all guns ever going to be banned,. So to those that want all guns banned, do you want to bann Turkey and pheasant hunting also? And deer hunting that puts food on the table and keeps the population in check and actually helps the animals? Those that want all guns banned are nuts.

[Fool In The Rain 60]

Slave to Zep, I like you alot. But you do live in a different world than we do. My guess is its far safer to walk the streets of Sydney at midnight than to venture through Queens or the Bronx. London, is a bit more like it is here. They have had their own problems, with the bombings and all. There is no fast or perfect solution to this nightmare. We know it, Obama knows it.

How is London a bit like it is there?

[LedZeppfan77]

How is London a bit like it is there?

Here. USA