See this poll on: https://poll.fm/6779522/embed
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
closed
you know iam realy sorry for the moms and dads of new town conn but this is away for the gov to disarm americans . but you will never keep guns away from people that want to do harm
Banning types of rifles or certain features on them will have no sway in any events that may come in the future. Further restricting firearms may make it slightly more difficult for these things to happen, but if there is a will, there is a way. Look at what happened at Virginia Tech in 2007. There were no "assault rifles" used, just two run of the mill pistols with 10 and 15 round magazines. 32 people were killed then. When these things happen, it isn't the fault of the media or the entertainment industry, as some may say. People, as humans should be taught and know the difference between right and wrong. It's compassion and understanding that we are lacking in the world. The people that commit these acts are missing something in their lives and minds. Until you change the hearts and minds of these people, they will always find a way.
It's difficult to imagine that passing laws restricting access to firearms will have any effect on gun violence and certainly won't have any effect on violence overall other than creating more defenseless victims. Criminals don't follow the law.
Laws prohibiting the manufacture and possession of methamphetamines have worked so well, no tweekers left are there?
Has anyone read about how well alcohol prohibition worked? How about cannabis prohibition? Yup, that was another big winner.
Now, in my best progressive whine, "... but we gotta do something".
How about better physical security for schools? That doesn't infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens or create a lot of new defenseless victims.
Bob...Well stated. People are trying to argue points about certain types of guns, when they have zero knowledge to begin with. "ALL semi-automatics should be banned" is what I keep hearing also. Problem is, people making those statements don't know the definition of the term semi-automatics.
More Guns = More Killing ...Lets say they did a legal transfer of these firearms like you say should be required. At that point they wouldn't have gone to school and killed a bunch of people, then themselves? Because they would be worried who the guns were "registered" to? And while were at it, why don't we charge the hardware store where they bought all of there bomb making supplies from with murder as well. Why stop there...lets blame the manufacturer of the car they drove to the school in.
When are people going to understand something? If someone plans on going to a location, any location, and killing as many people as they can until law enforcement shows up, then before anything can be done, killing themselves. THEY DON'T CARE WHAT LAWS THEY HAVE BROKEN IN OBTAINING WEAPONS. GUNS, KNIVES OR BOMBS...THEY DON'T CARE IF IT'S WRONG OR ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!
Juniper, we can create a law that might have stopped the Columbine shooting. Those boys went to the tanner gun show in denver with a friend who was 18 and she bought the guns for them. How about a law that you can't resell a gun without submitting info to the state, exactly like how we do it with cars. Every gun should be registered and all transfers should be public records. Illegal transfers should be severely punished, that girl should have been charged as an accessory to murder. If I sell my gun to some random guy on Craig's List and he kills someone I would expect to get into a lot of trouble. How about that for a start to gun regulation?
Its not the guns that is the problem, its a social issue. Our kids are brought up playing these killing, bloody, war games and such, I think it makes the kids immune to gun violence and they think it is cool. Our kids are so far behind when it comes to reality when they get into their teens. They are immature and are living in fantasy most of the time. It makes me sick to see what these kids are doing in there spare time. Its not just the parents fault, but the laws that won't let kids get a job early in their teen and on and on and on. New gun laws will not fix this problem. Get god in their life and the government out
If the principal or one of the teachers had had and gun and knew how to use it, perhaps they could have prevented the man from killing so many people. Maybe they could have killed him as he broke into the building. If he knew that school employees might be armed, he might not have even tried to go to a school to kill people.
The idea of the 2nd Amendment being all about individual gun rights is a fairly new concept. The Supreme Court considered it a protection of States rights to arm a militia, not the rights of an individual to bear arms. The Founding Fathers would not have been in favor of free and easy access to assault rifles. Their view (and intend, enshrined in the Constitutions 2nd Amendment) was to protect the right of Militia, not individuals, to ensure a government was kept in check by it's people.
What we have today is a travesty. 300 million guns and counting. 40,000 people killed every year with guns. Something must be done, and soon.
J. Woods has no idea of which she speaks. The 2nd amendment is not about shooting for sport or hunting, it's about one thing, the ability of the people to ensure the gov't. would fear the people, not the other way around.
Another point, to state that the types of guns used in Connecticut were intended only for mass killings is totally absurd. An AR-15 is very commonly used in various types of competition shooting and varmint hunting. Semi-auto handguns are the most commonly used type of guns in many handgun shooting sports. They're also the most practical defensive handgun.
What Ms. Woods seems to neglect is the serious mental illness that's a common factor in all these events.
Identifying and treating mental illness, not disarming honest citizens is the answer.
None of the shootings (from Columbine on) were actually committed by "criminals" but rather by the "boy next door." At least new legislation would inhibit/forbid the sale of products intended for little else but mass killings. These items are way beyond the scope of the 2nd amendment.