In partnership with CBSSports.com
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Who knows? Would she if magazines were smaller? I have no idea. Considering he was pretty much able to do whatever he wanted, I don't think reload time would have mattered much.
I'm not against regulating the size of magazines. That probably would have helped in Colorado. I just don't think it matters in this event.
I'm uncomfortable making leaps of judgement like if X happened instead of Y then Z still would have happened.
We can't completely eradicate murder, so let's do nothing!
I got the shotgun. You got the briefcase. It's all in the game though, right?
might have helped in arizona.
As Crofton said, there is evil in the world and always will be. Some of these tragedies will happen regardless. Having said that, there are common sense solutions that can be implemented to mitigate the likelihood of these happening.
Mandating background checks and making them more stringent along with closing the gun-show loophole are obvious starting points.
This post was edited by Sdog 19 months ago
Speaking of background checks, do you think the background check the school did for his mom revealed she owned two handguns and a rifle?
There have been varying reports of her being a teacher, only a substitute, etc. We don't know exactly yet. What's your point?
Except we haven't heard about it. If gun control was such an important issue to Democrats, why haven't their political leaders said anything about it in the past 2 or 3 election cycles? There have been a couple of these mass shootings during that time. Democrats had complete control both houses of Congress and the presidency from 2008 to 2010 and didn't enact any meaningful new gun control measures. That record makes me a little dubious of the motives of liberal politicians and media types that are now shouting (on camera of course) about doing SOMETHING about guns.
I don't doubt the sincerity of most people who are truly horrified by this and want to take steps to see that it doesn't happen again. But the self serving opportunism from pundits and politicians is disgusting.
Maybe we are thinking about this from the wrong angle?
There are those who contend that when fiat dies, gold and precious metals will take its place. Then, a smaller subset out there, claims that it matters not who owns the gold or silver. All that matters is who is in charge of the lead. The following inforgraphic from ammo.net may shed some much needed light on the topic, which as recent Thanksgiving record sales indicated, more and more people are starting to lock in on (and load). Is Ammo The New Gold? Full Infographic Via: Ammo.net From ammo.netThe threat of a U.S. double dip recession coupled with this summers official position on firearm regulation will change if he wins a second term.
Background checks aren't going to get you at the mental illness perps. Too much HPAA protection.
the mistake you're making is that you think all democrats believe in stricter gun control.
in addition, politicians are cowards and largely unwilling to do what's unpopular with a noisy group of people regardless of if they're in the majority. A "majority" of democrats does not mean "enough congressional votes." Republicans control the house but a "majority" of non tea party radical rights is not enough or equal to a majority of the chamber. It was the same back when Democrats controlled both houses. They still needed moderates and far lefties to agree on something, which isn't as easy as you think (health care act ring a bell?).
Moderate dems are afraid to go against the louder crazy far leftists while moderate republicans are afraid to go against tea party members.
read my post, nowhere did I say Democrats or Republicans. I just simply stated "people."
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by terpinexile 19 months ago
Agreed completely. The NRA has made anything close to resembling gun control a threat to our freedom or some bullshit and we are all complicit for letting that go. Every voter, every politician, on every side of the issue.
To think that we're forever bound to the whims of a bunch of farmers who were born 300 years ago, whose idea of "arms" was a 6' long, muzzle-loaded musket is ridiculous. Just because it's hard doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
I think we're approaching gun control from the wrong direction. DC has the strictest gun laws in the country but much of them focus on registration. It took me about $500, 2 trips to the courthouse (about 3 hours each) and a 4 hour gun safety course in order to register my handgun in DC.
I had a pretty good conversation with the officer who helped me at the courthouse. He said he had no reason to believe the process worked at all. "Anyone willing to go through this bullshit to register their gun isn't going to commit a crime with it. Anyone out there using their guns to commit a crime doesn't give a shit about registering it." He even said he felt sorry they make the law-abiding citizens go through such an elongated process.
I posted some charts and an article link above. There has been an obvious proliferation of firearm purchases in the past 7-8 years.
One could surmise currency debasement, economic hardship, or political instability (and how it relates to gun laws) are all factors in the recent hyper growth. One has to wonder if we were in a more stable, peacetime, bull market economy, would we even be discussing this?
In the meantime, basic reform is long overdue. Like many of our laws today, gun laws have become an outdated mutation of their initial intentions. Re-enact the assault weapon ban that lapsed in 2004. Again, there are a number of basic, sensible reforms that can be enacted to help mitigate the likelihood of tragedies happening.
It may be a corny analogy, but seat belt laws in cars are a basic example of mitigating vehicular death. Does it stop it? No. Does it help reduce it from occurring? Yes.
People just need to approach the conversation sensibly and not demagogue that guns are the biggest threat to human life (as the attached chart would argue).
I'd guess increases in firearm purchases have as much to do with the proliferation and consumption of gun-based entertainment in tv, movies and video games as the other factors you list. A lot of under 30 fools out there who spent their teens in first person shooters. Banning violence for entertainment would leave a grievous hole in my evening schedule, but I think you'd cut mass murder quicker and more effectively than going after the guns. First Amendment is only one amendment higher than the Second!
Maybe only men should be allowed to own guns.
It's the mother's fault that all this happened. Any idiot should know that you need to keep firearms away from a deranged retard.
I think its a valid point. Guns were much more on a "pedestal" to me growing up. Much more of an intimidating item. I get the sense (and don't know this myself not being of the generation) that millenials grew up playing Call of Duty etc and watching more violent tv may have trivialized guns to the point where they seem a more normal, unintimidating thing to use.
Just speculation, but I could definitely see it, especially with all the gun driven video games.
I always remember the book Monster that I had to read for a Sociology class I took at UMD. Autobiography of an LA gang member - expressed how at 12, 13 years old, being in a gang, using a gun was normal because that is what he grew up seeing, what was around him. That is what he knew as normal. The more guns are shown in media/video games etc. as a common, normal or accepted use, the more they will be used.
I wonder about the effect of 9/11 and terrorism as foreign policy issue number 1 for over a decade now. The Cold War and nuclear threat was perhaps a greater threat to our security as a nation, but I would bet that the threat of terrorism within the US has driven more people to take their personal safety into their own hands. Also the ridiculous mythology of Obama taking everyone's guns/Tea Party factor has contributed to the recent boom in gun sales.
If we're going to have an assault weapons ban, let's rewrite it entirely, because the one we had was both idiotic and ineffective.
First link is a great breakdown of what the legislation considered the criteria for an assault weapon. It's obvious that whoever crafted the bill had no clue what they were doing.
Fine, ban them all. That was easy.
Ban all what? Rifles? "Assault weapon" is an entirely arbitrary and subjective term. The shooting yesterday could have been carried out with a hunting rifle.
True, the lobbyists got a hold of the last one and ruined it. We'd need something like a base closings commission to do this right, the gun lobby makes Big Corn shudder in its scope and power. But fat chance that happens.
Given the reports about her being an avid gun collector who used to take her kid to the shooting range frequently, I think the chances are pretty good that she did.
Not posted approvingly or disapprovingly: Alleged to be from an elementary school in Israel
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports