We all know that but I'm not sure how it's relevant.

Greg

Kim,

It sounds like every single thing you ever learned about guns was taught to you by people who have never touched one. Please understand I am not blaming you. Most non gun members of our society have unwittingly fallen victim to these propagandists without ever stopping to consider that everything they think they know about the subject is probably false. Was every single thing you ever "learned" about guns your whole life brought to you by those with an irrational fear and hatred of them? Just as you wouldn't seek reading lessons from the illiterate, as a thinking person you should begin to suspect some of the things you thought you knew about guns are false. Gun free zones are where evil goes to rack up a big body count. Teachers fighting against bullets by throwing their body at them is how I see our gun free schools policy working out and we can do better.

(Sorry about the double post. Kim posted the exact same thing in another thread and I had to post this response there also.)

Kim,
You ask a lot of what if questions. Well, what if we make schools gun free zones? We already know the answer to that one, over and over. Lots of dead students. Yet every state in the Union except Illinois already allows concealed carry. How many problems have resulted? You are trading our liberty for a little false security. I'm not willing to do that.

Now you insinuate the teachers are also insane?....It never ceases to amaze me that some people are more fearful of the weapon in their own hand, than one in the hand of an insane shooter. I fear not the weapon in the hands of a good man.

Mass school shootings have occurred around the world even with strict gun control laws. Look up Germany, Scotland, etc. Look at Switzerland who encourages people to have guns - even fully automatic. Their gun crime rate is low Also did you forget about Timothy McVeigh. He didn't use a gun and killed 168 people and injured over 800. You can't fix crazy.

Scott-

You need to look it up, evidently. There have been 31 school shootings in the U.S. since Columbine. There have been 14 in the rest of the world in that time, combined.

Caffeinated - First of all it is around 31 in the World since columbine (you have it backwards) not 14. So I guess you need to look it up evidently. Here let me even help you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting

Also for fun here is some info on Switzerland:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

Here they are, in detail:

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2012/12/newtown_columbine_school_shootings_list.php

Count them.

Caffeinated - Nice try but it doesn't explain your obvious error in counting the ones around the world. 14 is only from Europe and doesn't include the rest of the world.

I noticed that list from that liberal blog included people who only committed suicide, people running on campus to avoid the police and others who just wanted to scare people. Not that excuses any of it. You missed the point completely. These things happen elsewhere even with strict gun controls. I am all for it IF you take away guns from everyone including the police and any other government organization including the president's detail. As far as I am concerned they have no more rights then anyone else.

Scott, I would assume the discrepency between the counts has to do with what qualifies as a "notable" incident (which the Wikipedia list notes). The 31 and 14 count I mentioned originally comes from ABCNews (Diane Sawyer reporting): https://twitter.com/ABCWorldNews/status/279634900188008448

If we take the counts reported on Wikipedia (which I'm more than willing to accept as a good source of data, it's well-cited), the basic point stands. It lists that the U.S. represents about half of all school shootings (including post-secondary) at around 24 since April '99. The rest of the world's listed incidents? 26. Again, not sure what constitutes "notable" by wikipedia standards but that's atrocious.

While South America has a higher per-capita rate of gun violence (or at least comparable), we are bloody by comparison to Europe, Australia, and Canada.

Here are some additional sources of the U.S. school shootings:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/14/1337221/a-timeline-of-mass-shootings-in-the-us-since-columbine/?mobile=nc

Here's a list that purports to list all school incidents since 1996 (seems light):
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html

" I am all for it IF you take away guns from everyone including the police and any other government organization including the president's detail."

What? Seriously? I'm talking to an anti-government gun nut? Wish you said so to begin with, I wouldn't have wasted the keystrokes.

Now I know why you people feel you need large-capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons. You're preparing to fight the United Nations takeover.

Crazy.

Caffinated - Wow resorting to name calling. If that makes you feel better feel free. While I am a libertarian I am not a crazy anti-government person but you can believe what you wish. I am fairly sure you wouldn't like me telling you what to do nor would I wish to. I also expect the same in return. No one has a right to tell me what I can or cannot own or what I can or cannot do so long as it is not causing harm to others. I strongly believe in individual freedom whether it be gay marriage, freedom of speech or the second amendment. I would hope you would extend the same courtesy to me but I have a feeling you would not if you had your druthers.

"Let's stop the madness now and practice some common sense gun control."
Turning our whole society into a gun free zone is what you call common sense?
The more places evil alone is allowed to have guns the worse this will get.

What's wrong with guns in schools? I went to a high school (SLUH) where I handled and shot guns every single day after school, sometimes on lunch too. Never been a problem.
The reason you can't remember when guns were so prevalent is Hollywood had not yet desensitized our youth to graphic violence. They WERE all around you everywhere you went (still are). You don't know it because by their silence they are proven to be in safe and sane hands.

I second this motion!

Wow, Don. You said so many things that could easily be countered but I will limit it to one. The NRA is uncompromising because they are protecting the 2nd Amendment and FREEDOM. There is no compromise on freedom. You're either for it or against it. We have a God-given right to self-protection and no man can legitimately take that right away.

Don misses so many facts, it's a bias beyiond logic. The "semi-automatic rifle" does not shoot 200-900 rds/min. The firearm carries the same ammunition as most conventional "looking" firearms, it just "looks" different. The NRA is the world wide leader in firearms education and hunter safety education in the world. "YES" the NRA/ILA works to protect 2nd amendment rights. I ask people "Which other constitutional right are you willing to give up?" Oh, how about religion or voting, perhaps freedom of speech or give up the right to search and seizure of your home, person or property? It's America....

What exactly did the Founding Fathers intend in the 2nd Amendment by the phrase “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed?” This has been the source of an ongoing debate in America for years. Let us briefly examine the question.
Did they intend that bearing arms was to provide protection against criminals? Civil authorities provide some protection from armed thugs by police forces. If our civil authorities claim that crime is effectively prevented by armed police forces, then it follows that there is no reason for the people to bear arms.
Did they intend that bearing arms was to hunt and kill animals for sustenance? In our society hunting is not required to procure meat. If people claim that hunting is brutal and unnecessary, then it follows that there is no reason for the people to bear arms.
Did they intend that the phrase the people implied a militia, and that bearing arms was only for military men? If our leaders claim that state national guard units constitute a militia, then it follows that there is no reason for the people to bear arms.
So that pretty much settles it, or does it? But there is another view, the real reason that our Founding Fathers insisted that the Constitution specified that private citizens have the right to bear arms.
The primary reason that we have the right to bear arms is to deter aggressive and oppressive acts committed by a government against the people.

"it's a bias beyiond logic"

I'd say the same about you, Mr. Perez. The idea that the AR-15 used (which is semi-automatic) isn't an assault rifle is ridiculous. It is built to kill people. A lot of people in an efficient manner. Parse that any way you like, but it's true.

There is no reason for you to own own a large-cap mag, semi-automatic weapon. You're only argument is that "it's legal." Well... I think the discussion should be whether it should be legal. The right to bear arms doesn't shouldn't allow you to bear arms that can kill masses of people. You don't need these things to hunt, and you certainly don't need it for self-protection.

Answer this for me: Why do you need a large-cap mag and semi-automatic weapon? Please, tell me what reason.

Give you a reason - how about competition. There are many people who participate for the sport of it. IDPA, USPSA, IPSC, Three Gun competition, etc. Additionally you do not have the right to tell me what I can or cannot own. I wouldn't presume to do the same to you. If me owning semi automatic weapons offends you them I am sorry but as far as I recall the constitution does not give you the right to not be offended. And again the police, etc does not have any more rights then me - I train more then most do and am at the range pretty much weekly. I was on the rifle team in high school and am ex military and have had training there as well so please do not lecture me on what rights I have.

Caffeinated,
Why do you think I need to justify my purchases to you or anyone else? I don't ask you to justify the size house you buy, the amount of food you eat, the car you buy (more people are killed by cars than guns each year), the number or kind of knives you buy, the baseball bat you buy, the swimming pool in your backyard, etc. Drownings are the number one cause of injury death for children age 1-4 according to the CDC. http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12186.html Will you be consistent and call for the outlawing of all dangerous items? Or just the ones you personally don't like?

Got that right, Stu.

So you need your semi-auto large-cap mag rifle to keep the government from oppressing you?

You're insane. You're all insane.

Yes, caffeinated, if the government is firing at me with semi-auto, large-capacity mag rifles, I definitely need the same to protect myself. That is the whole point of the 2nd Amendment. Try reading a little history so you can understand the genius of the Founding Fathers. If you think we don't need protection from the government, that we're somehow so far beyond that, as a foolish relative once told me, then you are at best, naive. But don't worry, those of us who understand that evil exists, will protect your rights too. We stand up for all rights, not just the ones we pick and choose.

No, I'll leave that to the ATF.

Good luck with the militia thing.

I don't worry about the ATF or obama. I fully support the Constitution of the United States. That includes The Second Amerndment.

Missouri "IS" an open carry State, (Art.1 Sec. 23 of the Mo. Constitution) except where prohibited by local laws. It is legal in State Parks and National Park Service Property as well. People have open carried in Missouri since it was founded. Sorry, no duels in the streets, it is practiced by many responsible fireams owners.

Then you are definitely naive, Don. And know absolutely nothing about history. Governments around the world have murdered well over 100,000,000 of their own citizens. Read about Ruby Ridge, the Waco incident and others in the United States. Guns in the hands of "paranoid gun toting crazies" are used 2,000,000 times a year to prevent crimes in this country. If CCW folks were causing so many problems like you think they are, it would be plastered all over the news because it would help the commie media further their anti-freedom agenda. But you don't hear about that do you? Still, you'd rather only the criminals be armed and your fellow law-abiding citizens be helpless victims. Thanks Don, but no thanks.
Try educating yourself. Read More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott and you'll see the benefits of an armed society that was eluded to earlier. You should be thanking us for making you more safe.

http://rense.com/general76/univ.htm

http://www.cato.org/policy-report/marchapril-2012/how-guns-stop-crimes

And check out this map of murder rates around the world. Explain why countries like Mexico, Brazil and Russia have much higher murder rates than the U.S., despite guns being highly restricted in those countries. The problem is not the inanimate object. It's people, societal problems, etc. Wake up and stop trying to give away your liberty in exchange for promises of a little false security.

Sorry, forgot the link to the map.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/12/2586195/world-murder-rates.html

You are so correct, Mac Messy!

Watch the folling youtube video, it might change opinions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=M1u0Byq5Qis