Simple solutions to school shootings

Taichiliberal said:
the operative word, the key word in your response is SALES. Whether it was from the manufacturer or individual, the Assault Weapons Ban was implemented against both! And again, CRUZ DID NOT HAVE A WEAPON UNTIL HE BOUGHT ONE....long after the AWB expired in 2004.

On this the OP stands valid, whether you like it or not. A matter of fact, a matter of history.
Click to expand...

the 04 AW ban did not prohibit private sales of weapons that were already in existence. if you don't know the law, please stop trying to argue that you do. your point is invalid as a matter of fact and history.
 
Peridot said:
Save us the same tired and fraudulent appeals to emotion, they have no place in a debate. What matters is facts, and the undeniable, immutable fact is that fewer people die from firearms every year, including children, and school shootings themselves are so statistically insignificant as to be discounted entirely. This is objective, dispassionate truth.
Click to expand...

And here is where your intellectual dishonesty comes to light: How in the world does repeating facts regarding the topic of discussion "fraudulent appeals to emotion"? I am not denying the set of facts you sourced...I am merely pointing to ANOTHER SET OF FACTS THAT DID NOT APPEAR IN YOUR SOURCE MATERIAL.

Why are you trying to deny these? What possible motive could you have, as the OP gives simple solutions that could have prevented the tragedy in Florida recently?
 
noise said:
In Cruz's case it was a failure of the FBI to follow up on a specific tip. did he not use a semi-automatic?
You can't possibly outlaw all semis

There is another thread about a temporary "gun violence restraining order" that makes sense.
Objective criteria the person being investigated really is an imminent threat. That's a good idea
Click to expand...

In Cruz's case, he purchased a weapon that for him made it easier to complete his task....a weapon that until 2004 was banned from sales to the civilian population.

Yes, the FBI dropped the ball....a ball that would not have been in play had the AWB was in place.

Go back and research the actual AWB law, as it did NOT ban all semis, as you allude to .
 
Taichiliberal said:
In Cruz's case, he purchased a weapon that for him made it easier to complete his task....a weapon that until 2004 was banned from sales to the civilian population.

Yes, the FBI dropped the ball....a ball that would not have been in play had the AWB was in place.

Go back and research the actual AWB law, as it did NOT ban all semis, as you allude to .
Click to expand...
I have limited interest in perusing gun laws. I hate the damn things.
But the point is weapons restrictions only go so far- and they are easily challenged as un-Constitutional.

That guys who shot up the black church in Charleston was making threats online and posing with Nazi paraphernalia.
That should be enough to take his guns, or at least mandate psychological follow up.
And then take his guns

It's more effective and "more" Constitutional to go after the situations/persons of interests, then pass gun laws that effect everyone
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the 04 AW ban did not prohibit private sales of weapons that were already in existence. if you don't know the law, please stop trying to argue that you do. your point is invalid as a matter of fact and history.
Click to expand...

True enough, and I did not specify such (I was referring to AFTER the law went into effect). But as we know Cruz DID NOT BUY HIS WEAPON FROM A PRIVATE CITIZEN, he went through the background check via a licensed dealer.

So once again, the OP stands valid. Try as you might, you can't debunk it...because despite what is out there on the individual level, NOT adding to the potential problem through another venue makes sense.
 
noise said:
I have limited interest in perusing gun laws. I hate the damn things.
But the point is weapons restrictions only go so far- and they are easily challenged as un-Constitutional.

That guys who shot up the black church in Charleston was making threats online and posing with Nazi paraphernalia.
That should be enough to take his guns, or at least mandate psychological follow up.
And then take his guns

It's more effective and "more" Constitutional to go after the situations/persons of interests, then pass gun laws that effect everyone
Click to expand...

Bottom line: the OP suggestions would cover your statements and remain firmly "constitutional". Remember, the AWB was constitutionally sound, the GOP had the votes to just let it expire and not renew it (on bended knee to the NRA lobby).
 
Taichiliberal said:
Bottom line: the OP suggestions would cover your statements and remain firmly "constitutional". Remember, the AWB was constitutionally sound, the GOP had the votes to just let it expire and not renew it (on bended knee to the NRA lobby).
Click to expand...
even the AWB can be changed with a change of SCOTUS. But i take your point on the ban.
I think it's much more effective, and less intrusive on Constitutional rights to use situational criteria to ban sales and possessions.

It just seems to me as a casual observer of the problem that we usually find lots of indicators that should have been utilized to prevent guns sales/possessions -after the fact. We need to be much more proactive.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Not to be callus, an AR-15 style rifle (Smith & Wesson M&P 15 .223) that Cruz had and a straight out AR-15 ARE STILL ASSAULT RIFLES THAT WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN AVAILABLE HAD THE AWB BEEN IN EFFECT. Remember, the AR-15 was designed for military training...an ASSAULT RIFLE CLASSIFICATION GIVEN BY MANUFACTURER AND MILITARY. And quite frankly, the small difference in classification is of little comfort to the families of the 17 victims in Florida.

I agree with you regarding the FBI and local cops, BUT if the AWB was in place, their competence would never had to be tested.
Click to expand...

Makes no difference at all....how the gun looks is totally irrelevant....they all operate the same way.....its scary looks does not make it any deadlier than any
other semi auto.....several use magazines just like the AR but don't look quite as 'military looking' as the AR....
How it was designed to look was for military training but again irrelevant.....and it looks like it does because they were trying to sell it to the military ...the that weapon
would be fully automatic capable....

List of assault rifles - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assault_rifles


An assault rifle is a rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge, has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic/fully automatic fire and a detachable magazine.
the AR sold in stores does not have this capability....but does have a detachable magazine....
Other than having a detachable magazine, an AR15 is no different than any other semi auto rifle...if that is your hangup, ban the magazine or limit its capacity if


it makes you feel better....ammo clips are, in reality, nothing more than smaller capacity magazines and can be changed in 2 or 3 seconds...


An ammunition clip is a device used to store individual rounds of ammunition together as a single unit that is then ready for insertion into the magazine of a gun.
gun-clip-vs-gun-magazine-300x262.png
A clip is a very simple device that is usually made of a steel stamping. There are various kinds of clips, the most common of which are called *en bloc clips (left) and stripper clips (right).
Again, these devices are used for loading ammunition into the magazine, which then feeds the individual rounds into the firing chamber.
For rifles with an internal magazine, the clip loads the bullets into the firearm itself (see image below).
Some rifles with detachable magazines can be loaded with clips, but this is relatively uncommon.


Educate yourself....
http://www.thefirearms.guide/blog/educational/assault-rifle
 
Last edited:
noise said:
even the AWB can be changed with a change of SCOTUS. But i take your point on the ban.
I think it's much more effective, and less intrusive on Constitutional rights to use situational criteria to ban sales and possessions.

It just seems to me as a casual observer of the problem that we usually find lots of indicators that should have been utilized to prevent guns sales/possessions -after the fact. We need to be much more proactive.
Click to expand...

Pro active was the AWB..based on what had transpired prior to it's passing. Americans have this knee jerk response to being told what they can and can't do...unfortunately that innate response is detrimental when it comes to guns.
 
NOVA said:
Makes no difference at all....how the gun looks is totally irrelevant....they all operate the same way.....its scary looks does not make it any deadlier than any
other semi auto.....several use magazines just like the AR but don't look quite as 'military looking' as the AR....
How it was designed to look was for military training but again irrelevant.....and it looks like it does because they were trying to sell it to the military ...the that weapon
would be fully automatic capable....

List of assault rifles - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assault_rifles


An assault rifle is a rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge, has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic/fully automatic fire and a detachable magazine.
the AR sold in stores does not have this capability....but does have a detachable magazine....
Other than having a detachable magazine, an AR15 is no different than any other semi auto rifle...if that is your hangup, ban the magazine or limit its capacity if


it makes you feel better....ammo clips are, in reality, nothing more than smaller capacity magazines and can be changed in 2 or 3 seconds...

Educate yourself....
http://www.thefirearms.guide/blog/educational/assault-rifle
Click to expand...


Sorry, but you can't keep throwing out the same snowstorm to avoid the simple fact; the AWB helped lower the amount of assault weapons being sold to the civilian population by listing some (but NOT all). https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0241.htm

When that law expired and the GOP fought against renewal, you had that avenue open up again. Given the number of school shooting and such
over the last few years, I dare say the AWB was a good thing when we had it.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/14/ar-15-mass-shootings/339519002/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States
 
Taichiliberal said:
Pro active was the AWB..based on what had transpired prior to it's passing. Americans have this knee jerk response to being told what they can and can't do...unfortunately that innate response is detrimental when it comes to guns.
Click to expand...

The only problem was it was banning AW look-alikes, along with real assault weapons.....as no real assault weapons could be legally saleable.....
a meaningless 'feel good' solution......
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
Sorry, but you can't keep throwing out the same snowstorm to avoid the simple fact; the AWB helped lower the amount of assault weapons being sold to the civilian population by listing some (but NOT all). https://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0241.htm

When that law expired and the GOP fought against renewal, you had that avenue open up again. Given the number of school shooting and such
over the last few years, I dare say the AWB was a good thing when we had it.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/14/ar-15-mass-shootings/339519002/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States
Click to expand...

There were no assault weapons ever being sold....that would be illegal...what you mean is assault weapon look alikes....just admit the truth for a change...

The fla. shooter could have the same damage with any other semi auto rifle not called an AR15
 
Taichiliberal said:
Okay, listen up NRA flunkies and republican/conservative wonks. To prevent shootings like what recently happened in Florida, you do the following:

1. Reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban. Had this been in place, Cruz would NOT have had an AR-15 in his possession.

2. Treat ALL weapons like an automobile. This means that they have to be licensed and registered, and the owner has to pass a written and physical competency test. This will severely cut down on the trafficking of illegal gun sales and greatly assist in the tracking of guns used in a crime.

Got that?
Click to expand...

How is this going to address the number of firearms, that are already in the hands of criminals??
 
Peridot said:
Save us the same tired and fraudulent appeals to emotion, they have no place in a debate. What matters is facts, and the undeniable, immutable fact is that fewer people die from firearms every year, including children, and school shootings themselves are so statistically insignificant as to be discounted entirely. This is objective, dispassionate truth.
Click to expand...
It would be a different story if you ever had kids and they were gunned down in a mass shooting incident.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
noise said:
In Cruz's case it was a failure of the FBI to follow up on a specific tip. did he not use a semi-automatic?
You can't possibly outlaw all semis

There is another thread about a temporary "gun violence restraining order" that makes sense.
Objective criteria the person being investigated really is an imminent threat. That's a good idea

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...-you-think-of-gun-violence-restraining-orders
Click to expand...
Clinton banned semi-automatics.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
Taichiliberal said:
No, you don't. Because the Assault Weapons Ban did NOT affect those who legally purchased said weapons prior to the law going into effect. Cruz had purchased his weapon AFTER the law expired and the Party of NO did NOT renew it under the Shrub or Obama.
Click to expand...

Two words: Black market

Here’s a novel idea: don’t pass any more laws for the criminals to break. But allow teachers to be armed. No, encourage them to be armed. Then put a sign in front of the school advertising the fact it is NOT A GUN FREE ZONE.

The deranged shooters will take the hint.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Yes, but none of them were owned by Cruz prior to his personal purchase. He didn't borrow or steal his AR-15, nor was it given to him as a gift. HE LEGALLY PURCHASED IT IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. So my first point on the OP stands.
Click to expand...

He could have used any other gun...just as effectively.
So...back to ground floor...ban all guns.

Your simple solution is simple.

Why not park a cruiser at each school?
Are children not worth the cost?

What about hardening the schools?

What about guarding the schools with specially trained guards, perhaps vets?

I heard they need jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top