Doctor Fate wrote:Don't vote for it.

Don't vote for it and claim to be for reducing spending.

There are over 138,000 public and private schools (Primary and secondary) in the United States.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84

To keep one guard in each school, armed and uniformed (bullet proof vest) . To provide back up for sick days, and to provide training, supervision, management etc. .....probably around $100,000 a year per school.
Cost $13,800,000,000 per year.

Doctor Fate wrote:[

With regard to your contention that limiting magazines would not help, there is evidence from the. Arizona shooting. The shooting was stopped when he tried to reload. We have your opinion that shooters can reload quickly so that magazine limitations would not help

That's not opinion; look it up. It doesn't take long to change magazines.

Are you serious? How long does it take a skilled shooter to change a magazine? Even if a short time, how many rounds could the same shooter fire from a semi- (let alone full-) automatic weapon in the same time? Are you really trying to say magazine limitations don't matter?

Even a short break in firing presents an opportunity for someone to attempt an intervention, or a chance for victims to flee/hide/etc...

And what of an unskilled/semi-skilled shooter?

Regarding the Giffords shooting:

Loughner allegedly proceeded to fire apparently randomly at other members of the crowd.[2][20] He reportedly used a 9mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol with a 33-round magazine.[21][22] A nearby store employee said he heard "15 to 20 gunshots".[23] Loughner stopped to reload, but dropped the loaded magazine from his pocket to the sidewalk, from where bystander Patricia Maisch grabbed it.[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting

So, it wasn't Loughner "trying to reload" that stopped him. It was his incompetence at reloading.

If you want to bet the farm on incompetence, help yourself.

Even if you don't 'bet the farm' on incompetence, every time a shooter has to reload there is another opportunity for a mistake, especially if s/he is not very skilled. What if someone nearby takes the opportunity of a break in the firing to throw a book/stapler/flowerpot/whatever at the shooter, might that increase the chances of a mistake?

These may be silly examples, but come on! It defies common sense to say that magazine limitations won't have any effect.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:Don't vote for it.

Don't vote for it and claim to be for reducing spending.

Please point to one single post I've EVER written complaining about town spending.

Rudewalrus is correct about the magazine changing being a possibility of human error interjected. I have seen trained military people try to shoot and the magazine falls out because it was not locked in.

That being said, it it not the magazine or the bullet or gun that is killing. It is the person. We have identified that mental disorder is a contributing factor. I suggest following:
License for ownership
Training for ownership (Hunter/safety courses are already in place)
Mental prohibition of gun ownership
Restraining orders prohibition

Other than that, gun ownership should not be restricted.

What are others recommending? I am sick of hearing what others don't like. I want to hear, really I do.

Rudewalrus wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:[

With regard to your contention that limiting magazines would not help, there is evidence from the. Arizona shooting. The shooting was stopped when he tried to reload. We have your opinion that shooters can reload quickly so that magazine limitations would not help

That's not opinion; look it up. It doesn't take long to change magazines.

Are you serious? How long does it take a skilled shooter to change a magazine? Even if a short time, how many rounds could the same shooter fire from a semi- (let alone full-) automatic weapon in the same time? Are you really trying to say magazine limitations don't matter?

Could they make a difference?

Sure, but less than, for example, having armed security at Sandy Hook.

As I've said, the larger the magazine, the larger the spring and the more problematic maintenance is. Furthermore, you are talking about marginal improvement, not prevention.

Even a short break in firing presents an opportunity for someone to attempt an intervention, or a chance for victims to flee/hide/etc...

And what of an unskilled/semi-skilled shooter?

I don't think we see a lot of these in mass shootings.

Even if you don't 'bet the farm' on incompetence, every time a shooter has to reload there is another opportunity for a mistake, especially if s/he is not very skilled. What if someone nearby takes the opportunity of a break in the firing to throw a book/stapler/flowerpot/whatever at the shooter, might that increase the chances of a mistake?

Sure, because John McClane is in the crowds at many of these things.

These may be silly examples, but come on! It defies common sense to say that magazine limitations won't have any effect.

Hypothesis.

With this topic, I wish you all well.

I don't think you will find many people suggest every single school (elementary especially) should have armed guards. This was a crazy insane situation that just doesn't happen. To even try and foresee such a crazy situation and try limit it is going overboard. This was a situation where a mentally ill person was determined to cause mass killings. The law worked, he was prohibited from owning a gun, he stole guns, he was locked out of the school, he broke in. He was going to pull this off and to try to now cover this bizarre situation like it's in any sort of way common is simply foolish. And what happens when some lunatic decides to blow up a preschool with a bomb? It sucks but Sh1t happens and this is one of those really sad times... not trying to diminish it, it's sad and terrible but so has been so many other crazy things.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:Don't vote for it.

Don't vote for it and claim to be for reducing spending.

Please point to one single post I've EVER written complaining about town spending.

I've never seen one. But let's be clear, 'government' is not just Federal. Towns, counties, states, all have 'governments', all receive taxes, and all have spending. It's disingenuous to pretend that there's no relation between them.

GMTom - the head of the NRA proposed it. He's not a lot of people, but he is speaking for millions and has a pretty public forum to express his view.

tom

This was a crazy insane situation that just doesn't happen.

There have been 51 school shootings in the USA since 1991.
. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sc ... ted_States

Banning semi automatic weapons wouldn't just affect shootings at schools, it would have affect in the movie theatres, malls, post offices and etc.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Please point to one single post I've EVER written complaining about town spending.

I've never seen one. But let's be clear, 'government' is not just Federal. Towns, counties, states, all have 'governments', all receive taxes, and all have spending. It's disingenuous to pretend that there's no relation between them.

No, it's not disingenuous. It is the difference between conservatives and liberals. We like local government best. We believe local government is more in tune to the needs of residents.

If my town votes for a dedicate tax, that is entirely different than another TSA-type mess.

rickyp wrote:tom

This was a crazy insane situation that just doesn't happen.

There have been 51 school shootings in the USA since 1991.
. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sc ... ted_States

Banning semi automatic weapons wouldn't just affect shootings at schools, it would have affect in the movie theatres, malls, post offices and etc.

Tom specifically cited "elementary schools." Your list is all over the map.

However, it is exactly the sort of post that has me thinking, "I have better things to do."

Like read, play Diplomacy, or even gouge my eyes.

rickyp wrote:Banning semi automatic weapons wouldn't just affect shootings at schools, it would have affect in the movie theatres, malls, post offices and etc.

One last note before I leave: no chance for a ban on "semi-automatic weapons." That sort of ban would include most pistols sold in America. Maybe, should I return here one day, you'll have learned to try and make some sense when you post.

Doctor Fate wrote:Tom specifically cited "elementary schools." Your list is all over the map.

Actually, his post talked about 'every single school', and included elementary schools. It was not specific to them alone. He also mentioned pre-schools.

However, it is exactly the sort of post that has me thinking, "I have better things to do."

Like read, play Diplomacy, or even gouge my eyes.

Or even reading it and the previous ones properly?

fate

Tom specifically cited "elementary schools." Your list is all over the map

.

Well, mass shootings are all over the map.
Or do they only become horrible events if they take place in elementary schools?

Doctor Fate wrote:No, it's not disingenuous. It is the difference between conservatives and liberals. We like local government best. We believe local government is more in tune to the needs of residents.

Is it 'the' difference? They are all governments. Sure, local government can be more 'in tune' with the needs of residents. It can also entrench power with special interests just as easily as central government. It can still be corrupt, it can still enact discriminatory law, it can still overtax, it can still go bankrupt.

Me, I don't 'like' one level of government more or less than any other. Perhaps I need to indulge in ideological dichotomies more often to fit in...