Gunfire in St Paul (transporting, violent crime, buy)

[Mason3000]

Originally Posted by trip_shakespeare

And here I thought that the above particular locations, schools and places of employment, were targets because the crazed gun-nut perpetrators either went to school or worked at, or otherwise had an "issue" with, said establishments.

Way to miss the entire point!

We already have "no gun" zones in our country & they don't work because criminals don't follow the law or respect those zones, if they did then I might get on board with gun control. Instead, all they do is ensure no one can defend themselves from the criminals. If you expand these zones to the entire country it simply exaggerates the point.

[trip_shakespeare]

Way to miss the entire point!

We already have "no gun" zones in our country & they don't work because criminals don't follow the law or respect those zones, if they did then I might get on board with gun control. Instead, all they do is ensure no one can defend themselves from the criminals. If you expand these zones to the entire country it simply exaggerates the point.

You said that crazed gun-nuts shoot up schools and places of employment because there aren't other crazed gun nuts at said places. To evidence this, you said that gun shows never experience such violence. Your point, ridiculous and simplistic as it was, was perfectly clear.

As for gun control, we live in the most violent, gun-happy advanced nation on earth. A place where over 70,000 persons are wounded by gunfire each year - so, yea, this isn't something we should attempt to control. We should just see to it that even more people are armed! SUPER GENIUS!

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by trip_shakespeare

You said that crazed gun-nuts shoot up schools and places of employment because there aren't other crazed gun nuts at said places. To evidence this, you said that gun shows never experience such violence. Your point, ridiculous and simplistic as it was, was perfectly clear.

As for gun control, we live in the most violent, gun-happy advanced nation on earth. A place where over 70,000 persons are wounded by gunfire each year - so, yea, this isn't something we should attempt to control. We should just see to it that even more people are armed! SUPER GENIUS!

Actually, it does seem that you missed his point. We have areas where we "control" guns. It doesnt seem to work. All the loaded language in your responses does not change that fact.

[trip_shakespeare]

Originally Posted by trip_shakespeare

Actually, it does seem that you missed his point. We have areas where we "control" guns. It doesnt seem to work. All the loaded language in your responses does not change that fact.

I understand that so called "gun-free" zones do not deter crime, but they do stiffen the penalties for those who commit crimes in those areas. Therefore, I do think they are of some value.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

I would love to see gun production and available stop in this country, especially non-hunting/sporting weapons.

I think you will always see long guns (rifles and shotguns) available in this country because so many areas have a strong hunting culture, and because the hunting is sometimes needed because otherwise wildlife will reproduce out of control and die due to starvation.

I personally don't believe as strongly in small arms outside of one's household, but I'm not sure how you could get those who have a tendency to cause harm with them to disarm. Some sort of amnesty deal in exchange for turning in weapons?

The threat from the folks who use them illegally (as in using them to commit crimes) is one of the main reasons why others want to carry legally. Some people just wanted to carry out of principle, however, and I understand that as well. The US has a long history with personal weapons that much of the rest of the western world does not share.

Something you may not know. The City of Kennesaw, Georgia (a northwestern suburb of Atlanta) has a law on the books which says that the head of every household in the city must have a weapon and ammunition for that weapon stored in their home.

A person can opt out for religious reasons or simply because of a desire to not have a weapon, and the actual impact of the law on the community is sometimes debated, but it's my understanding that the law itself has had a deterring affect on crime levels in the local area.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

I personally don't believe as strongly in small arms outside of one's household, but I'm not sure how you could get those who have a tendency to cause harm with them to disarm. Some sort of amnesty deal in exchange for turning in weapons?

What is so important about having small arms in the household? I grew up in a gun-free household and it seemed to work out ok. We didn't have to worry about accidental shootings, which was nice. I'm not talking about the current weapons that are already in the wrong hands as much as stopping the continued production and sale of small arms and assault weapons to the general public. Personally I have no issue with those items only being available to the military and law enforcement. That would eventually dwindle the supply of firearms in gangs, crazy college kids, DC snipers, and the like.

The threat from the folks who use them illegally (as in using them to commit crimes) is one of the main reasons why others want to carry legally.

It bothers me that people think the solution to a gun problem is to fight fire with fire and just pile guns on top of guns, give everybody and their 2 year old gun for protection. Haven't you ever heard the "two wrongs doesn't make a right" saying? The clear better solution is to get rid of the damn things altogether.

Some people just wanted to carry out of principle, however, and I understand that as well. The US has a long history with personal weapons that much of the rest of the western world does not share.

Yes, we all are quite fond of our country's history and the forefathers. That being said it should be no insult to our heritage to kindly put it to rest along with slavery and every other outdated belief that may have been relevant back in the 1700's.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

What is so important about having small arms in the household?

To me, nothing. I don't have a gun at all in my house, so it obviously isn't as important to me. I'm also not a member of the NRA currently, but it bothers me to see blatant misinformation posted in a forum about a group when I know several members of that group fairly well (some for 20 years or more).

From what I've been able to determine, though, there are a few common reasons among folks I know both in MN and in GA, including:

(1) Some people live in areas where break-ins have occurred, and some states (like Georgia, for example) have laws in place which give a property owner certain rights to use deadly force when threatened on their own property.

(2) A certain percentage of the folks I know who carry are former military or current cops, and they seem to like having a weapon at home for comfort reasons.

(3) Some like the idea of being able to defend themselves even though there isn't an immediate threat.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

Both great points. It's easier to understand the gun availability issue when you look at other countries that don't have gun violence problems and realize that more than anything it is due to the fact that most guns simply aren't legal and available in those places. Then there are countries like Mexico. They wouldn't have a gun violence problem if violent firearms weren't so availalble and easy to come by in the U.S. Otherwise try to find an assualt weapon anywhere in Mexico. Outside of maybe Tepito in Mexico City they don't exist.

I would love to see gun production and available stop in this country, especially non-hunting/sporting weapons.

Feel free to start working on that constitutional amendment....


No, the citizens of Mexico may not have access to guns....but there is plenty of gun violence all over Mexico.

[trip_shakespeare]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Feel free to start working on that constitutional amendment....


No, the citizens of Mexico may not have access to guns....but there is plenty of gun violence all over Mexico.

The citizens of Mexico do, in fact, have access to guns. They can own handguns - legally. Of the illegal firearms in Mexico, the vast majority are smuggled in from the US.

That said, Cruz Azul Guy is spot on.

[pzrOrange]

Originally Posted by trip_shakespeare

As for gun control, we live in the most violent, gun-happy advanced nation on earth. A place where over 70,000 persons are wounded by gunfire each year - so, yea, this isn't something we should attempt to control. We should just see to it that even more people are armed! SUPER GENIUS!

how about we start to control the real root cause of gun violence? the crazy people and their irresponsible behavior? and no, this is not society's fault. its the fault of those crazy people. its the same pople who would kill others with guns, knives, axes, baseball bats, and with bare hands if they have to.

blaming guns for mass killings is like blaming spoons for fat people.