[★★★★★]

With the topic looming large after the Sandy Hook Shooting, what are your opinions about enacting stricter gun control in the US and why? To what extent should it be enacted? Opinions of non-Americans appreciated.

[Tattle]

Lemme start the conversation since everyone else is too scared.

I think if someone is going to purchase a gun, they should have to spend a good amount of time with a professional to learn about handling, storing, and usage of their weapon. That way they can view it as a tool, and not a toy.

The second amendment is there for a reason, increased gun control could mark a dangerous shift in the power relationship between the people and the government. Freedom to carry weapons and firearms is the biggest safeguard the Americans have against tyranny. If they want to stop school shootings they should focus on hiring school psychologists and start preventative measures against bullying seeing as how most of the kids perpetrating them do so because their lives are made unbearable by it.

[Bohica60]

I know you asked for non-American opinions, but as one of the "targets" of any new gun-control regulations, I feel a need to speak out.

The idea that new, stricter gun-controls will help curb this is total BS!

Making things tougher for the legal law-abiding gun owner will do absolutely NOTHING to stop a psychopath like this. HE was NOT in the "legal law-abiding gun owner" category. He killed his MOTHER to obtain HER legally-owned firearms. But that is just one way to acquire firearms. There are a great many ways firearms can be obtained, most of them illegal. ("Psychopath" is the nicest way I can think of to describe someone who would do something like this!)

I hate that the gun-control groups always try to play these stories out as, "if we had greater gun-control, this would/could not have happened."

BULL$^#@! The psychopath would just obtain firearms another way.

Yet, once again, the law-abiding gun owners will be the ones who suffer the most because of so-called 'people' like this! They (the law-abiding gun owners) will be made the scapegoats and whipping horses for these new attacks on our Second Amendment.

Funny, isn't it, that nobody seems to notice (or care about) the little fact that these attacks are NOT carried out by law-abiding gun owners (the ones who will be affected the most by new regulations), and who have already submitted to numerous regulations regarding firearms (depending on their location), just to legally obtain and own firearms?

All any new regulations will do is bind the hands of the law-abiding gun owners even more. And they won't have ANY effect on possible future shootings!

Why? Because the type of psychopath who would do something like this DOESN'T FOLLOW RULES AND REGULATIONS to acquire the tools he/she needs to commit these acts.

I am a (legal) gun-owner. I am a Concealed-Carry Permit holder (mandatory training, FBI check, NCIS check, fingerprint check, state versions of the FBI & NCIS checks, etc.). I have one of those very same rifles (Bushmaster XM15-E2S) used in this shooting.

But guess what? I have NEVER even thought about doing something like that, past, present, or future! The very idea is repulsive to me!

I am the type who would have been trying to do whatever I could to STOP someone like this. Just because I own firearms (even the same make and model as was used in this case) does NOT mean that I am going to do something like this.

Yet, I and others like me, will be the ones who have to take the brunt of any new legislation that is due to this incident, NOT the psychopaths who actually DO something as terrible as this.

[michaldu]

Don't give away your guns.

My nation was stripped from any firearms and they were banned while we were occupied by our neighbour states. Firearms ban was introduced to make us harder to riot and fight for freedom against the occupant. Even though we've regained our independance, my country is one of European leaders of how-not-to-let-a-citizen-get-a-gun.

To legally own a piece of firearm in here you need to complete psychological tests, pay for it and get a decision from a local police. They don't need to justify the decision...

[atreidesx69]

First of all, I'm from the Philippines and here the right to bear arms is a privilege not a right. For the record I'm a gun owner, and I also have a PTCFOR (Permit to Carry Firearms Outside of Residence: the term here for concealed carry permit). Just recently, there was an incident involving firearms here wherein a man went amuck and started going house to house and shooting his neighbors. The toll was 7 dead, including children and a pregnant woman, 11 wounded as well. My point is, if only one of his neighbors has a gun, I'm sure that person would have tried to stop the shooter. It is always better to have one and not need it than need one and you don't have it. Just be responsible if you have one and learn how to handle, shoot, and keep it safe properly. I hope Americans fight for their right to bear arms what with all the impending gun control law being touted about.

[krazylowell]

PASSING MORE [ FEEL GOOD ] LAWS WILL DO NOTHING, THE ONES THAT ARE DOING THESE CRIMES

DON' T CARE OR OBEY THE LAWS. ENFORCE THE LAWS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.

[jatboylover]

i am not giving any opinion but i have to say that u all sound like firearm lobbyists.

[Beukies]

First of all I'd like to congratulate Bohica for his well written and excellently explained reply.

I agree 100% with him. Criminal, psychopaths and the such, don't abide by the same rules as law-abiding citizens. But they (the criminals) are not the ones who are targetted, it is honest-joe down the street who wants to protect his family and property who are being persecuted.

This whole gun banning effort is just what the 2nd Amendment warns against. Tyranny! Every country where guns were taken from law-abiding citizen experienced mass murders by their governments and occupying forces, because they could not defend themselves!

My message to all Americans: STAND YOUR GROUND! FORCE THEM (Libtards) TO ADHERE TO YOUR CONSTITUTION!

First of all I'd like to congratulate Bohica for his well written and excellently explained reply.

I agree 100% with him. Criminal, psychopaths and the such, don't abide by the same rules as law-abiding citizens. But they (the criminals) are not the ones who are targetted, it is honest-joe down the street who wants to protect his family and property who are being persecuted.

This whole gun banning effort is just what the 2nd Amendment warns against. Tyranny! Every country where guns were taken from law-abiding citizen experienced mass murders by their governments and occupying forces, because they could not defend themselves!

My message to all Americans: STAND YOUR GROUND! FORCE THEM (Libtards) TO ADHERE TO YOUR CONSTITUTION!

This is kind of an ironic post, since it is only uneducated people who believe the government is trying to take away our guns and our rights.

The only proposals being suggested is a ban on assault rifles which is basically a joke, since it wouldn't actually ban them, just limit their capabilities. You would still be able to walk around with a fully functional AR15, unloaded, but who's gonna know that?

There are also proposals for tougher background checks and possibly even some mental health checks, which may not be bad ideas, considering something like that may have kept the Sandy Hook shooter's mother from owning so many guns around her obviously ill son, (of course he always could have built a bomb or something else, so who knows. I do not believe that he had the social skills to obtain one illegally as Bohica suggested, and I would also add that 90% of gun crimes are committed with legally purchased firearms) but the chances of anything getting passed and signed into law is slim to none. Most people (being about 60%) in the US do not favor tougher gun laws, many Liberals included, being one myself. As to the possibility of the 2nd Amendment ever being removed from the Constitution, that will certainly never happen in our lifetimes, if ever.

If we want to truly reduce crime and murders, we should focus on our culture of poverty and inequality and unobtainable overpriced healthcare.

[kellyking29]

I think they need to look at which gun are legal and which aren't

I admit to knowing little about guns but, i really don't understand the need for anyone to possess an automatic rifle they cause too much damage for hunting and protection.

I think even if we make these guns illegal the criminals will still possess then.....
so then what?????????

[Bohica60]

First of all I'd like to congratulate Bohica for his well written and excellently explained reply.

I agree 100% with him. Criminal, psychopaths and the such, don't abide by the same rules as law-abiding citizens. But they (the criminals) are not the ones who are targetted, it is honest-joe down the street who wants to protect his family and property who are being persecuted.

This whole gun banning effort is just what the 2nd Amendment warns against. Tyranny! Every country where guns were taken from law-abiding citizen experienced mass murders by their governments and occupying forces, because they could not defend themselves!

My message to all Americans: STAND YOUR GROUND! FORCE THEM (Libtards) TO ADHERE TO YOUR CONSTITUTION!

This is kind of an ironic post, since it is only uneducated people who believe the government is trying to take away our guns and our rights.

The only proposals being suggested is a ban on assault rifles which is basically a joke, since it wouldn't actually ban them, just limit their capabilities. You would still be able to walk around with a fully functional AR15, unloaded, but who's gonna know that?

There are also proposals for tougher background checks and possibly even some mental health checks, which may not be bad ideas, considering something like that may have kept the Sandy Hook shooter's mother from owning so many guns around her obviously ill son, (of course he always could have built a bomb or something else, so who knows. I do not believe that he had the social skills to obtain one illegally as Bohica suggested, and I would also add that 90% of gun crimes are committed with legally purchased firearms) but the chances of anything getting passed and signed into law is slim to none. Most people (being about 60%) in the US do not favor tougher gun laws, many Liberals included, being one myself. As to the possibility of the 2nd Amendment ever being removed from the Constitution, that will certainly never happen in our lifetimes, if ever.

If we want to truly reduce crime and murders, we should focus on our culture of poverty and inequality and unobtainable overpriced healthcare.

This is kind of an ironic post, since it is only uneducated people who believe the government is trying to take away our guns and our rights.

I am most definitely NOT "uneducated" and having jumped through all the government hoops to own and carry my own guns, I know that only a fool would believe that the government is NOT trying to take away our guns and our rights.

The only proposals being suggested is a ban on assault rifles which is basically a joke, since it wouldn't actually ban them, just limit their capabilities. You would still be able to walk around with a fully functional AR15, unloaded, but who's gonna know that?

Wrong again. We did this once already (it did not work then and has fortunately expired). The gun-control people tried to get ANY firearm that fires more than a single shot classified as an "assault rifle." (including semi-auto rifles such as the AR-15)

There are also proposals for tougher background checks and possibly even some mental health checks, which may not be bad ideas

ATF Form 4473 (Which MUST be filled out prior to the purchase of ANY legal firearm (see item "F")
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
They are already pretty darn thorough! (See my post above)(mandatory training, FBI check, NCIS check, fingerprint check, state versions of the FBI & NCIS checks, etc.) Granted, this was for the CCW permit, but still ...
Once again, the psychopath doesn't care because he/she will not be filling this out.

something like that may have kept the Sandy Hook shooter's mother from owning so many guns

Why should HER rights be limited just because there are psychopaths out there in the world? People like this are an argument FOR having the right to as many as she wants.

I do not believe that he had the social skills to obtain one illegally

He was also not old enough to legally purchase/own some of the guns.

I would also add that 90% of gun crimes are committed with legally purchased firearms

Not sure where you are getting your "facts", but, not true. Most crimes committed by criminals with "legally purchased firearms" are firearms that were stolen - these crimes (for the most part) are NOT committed by the legal owner.

but the chances of anything getting passed and signed into law is slim to none.

Incorrect again. IT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED ONCE, although it had a shelf life and has since expired.

* * * * * * *

And here's something to think about. Even if they are passed, gun control laws DO NOT WORK! Examples:

* - Morton Grove, Illinois - In 1981, Morton Grove became the first town in America to prohibit the possession of handguns.
(You COULD NOT own a handgun if you lived there)

* - Kennesaw, Georgia - In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition.
(You were REQUIRED to own a handgun/firearm if you lived there)

GUESS which one experience a HIGHER crime rate, including murder, armed robbery, armed burglary, rape, etc., and which one saw a dramatic DROP in those same crimes.

"Let's see, should I break into this home/rob this guy/etc? Oh wait, there is a gun ban and they can't have firearms = Easy pickings!"
V.S.
"Let's see, should I break into this home/rob this guy/etc? Oh wait, there is mandatory gun ownership here and they have to have firearms = Maybe I should go somewhere else!"

The crime statistics for these two cities over the next ten years show me which city I would rather live in!

I am most definitely NOT "uneducated" and having jumped through all the government hoops to own and carry my own guns, I know that only a fool would believe that the government is NOT trying to take away our guns and our rights.

Wasn't directed towards you. But no I don't believe the government is trying to take away our guns. I'm sure there are a few politicians who would like to, but they certainly don't constitute the entire government or the current administration.

Wrong again. We did this once already (it did not work then and has fortunately expired). The gun-control people tried to get ANY firearm that fires more than a single shot classified as an "assault rifle." (including semi-auto rifles such as the AR-15)

AR15s and the like were never completely banned. It did require the fire pin and mechanism to be modified so that automatic fire wasn't possible. Or other modifications to the gun stock and barrel. But all semi-auto weapons weren't affected as pretty much all guns are semi-automatic these days, handguns included. SMGS were also affected by the previous ban. In short, there were a ton of loopholes that made it easy to bypass the laws. And of course all previously manufactured weapons were still legal to buy and sell. Basically it was a joke that ended up making no difference.

But again we're in agreement on this, it didn't work then and it won't work now and I'm not in favor of it. I think our only disagreement on this is the interpretation of the law, the intent of the government and the fact that it has any chance at all of passing congress, senate and being signed into law. The political climate is extremely different than it was 20 years ago. And the American people are against new laws as well, even in the wake of these shootings, most people, myself included, still don't want new laws.[/quote]

ATF Form 4473 (Which MUST be filled out prior to the purchase of ANY legal firearm (see item "F")
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
They are already pretty darn thorough! (See my post above)(mandatory training, FBI check, NCIS check, fingerprint check, state versions of the FBI & NCIS checks, etc.) Granted, this was for the CCW permit, but still ...
Once again, the psychopath doesn't care because he/she will not be filling this out.

Well not really, most of those checks are required only for handguns and of course the CCW permits. There is also the gunshow loophole. Laws also vary by state.

Why should HER rights be limited just because there are psychopaths out there in the world? People like this are an argument FOR having the right to as many as she wants.

My reasoning for that statement was because of her son being the psychopath, at the very least she should have had them secured in a gunsafe with only herself having the combination. In the end it cost her her own life and that of all the children. It's kinda the same reason, you don't want guns around convicts in jail, it gives them easy access to it. As such corrections officers don't carry firearms on duty.

He was also not old enough to legally purchase/own some of the guns.

Yeah the laws actually worked in his case. It's too bad his mother gave him access.

Not sure where you are getting your "facts", but, not true. Most crimes committed by criminals with "legally purchased firearms" are firearms that were stolen - these crimes (for the most part) are NOT committed by the legal owner.

I can't find my source right now. But I believe it was FBI statistics, and I think it was homicides only; not all crimes that involved a weapon, may have even included suicides which account for 2/3 of all deaths caused by firearms anyway. Because you're right that the extreme majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens. My wording was a little vague on that point and it was meant as just an aside.

On second thought, It also could have been a study solely based on mass shootings.

Incorrect again. IT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED ONCE, although it had a shelf life and has since expired.

Again the original ban was a joke, that's why it was allowed to expire. In any case, I'm talking specifically about the current political climate and makeup of the government.

And here's something to think about. Even if they are passed, gun control laws DO NOT WORK! Examples:

* - Morton Grove, Illinois - In 1981, Morton Grove became the first town in America to prohibit the possession of handguns.
(You COULD NOT own a handgun if you lived there)

* - Kennesaw, Georgia - In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition.
(You were REQUIRED to own a handgun/firearm if you lived there)

GUESS which one experience a HIGHER crime rate, including murder, armed robbery, armed burglary, rape, etc., and which one saw a dramatic DROP in those same crimes.

"Let's see, should I break into this home/rob this guy/etc? Oh wait, there is a gun ban and they can't have firearms = Easy pickings!"
V.S.
"Let's see, should I break into this home/rob this guy/etc? Oh wait, there is mandatory gun ownership here and they have to have firearms = Maybe I should go somewhere else!"

The crime statistics for these two cities over the next ten years show me which city I would rather live in!

Again we're in total agreement on this. I will say it again so that you will understand - I do not believe in gun control or more regulations being enforced. I'm just not paranoid about the government trying to take our guns. The only things I'm not entirely against are possibly some form of mental health checks in some cases and extending background checks to include all weapons, not just handguns and possibly closing the gunshow loophole. But even those things constitute a slippery slope in my opinion and I really don't think we will end up with anything in the foreseeable future. And I'm okay with that as we have much more important things to worry about and fix.

[zackddog]

Yet, I and others like me, will be the ones who have to take the brunt of any new legislation that is due to this incident, NOT the psychopaths who actually DO something as terrible as this.

Illegal guns or the use of a legally obtained weapon for illegal purposes is a problem that can be compared to legal drugs being sold and used in illegal ways, they will exist as long as a demand for them exist.

New, more stringent laws will only affect the perfectly stable and law abiding citizen that wishes to own a fire arm. New laws won't stop the psychos and the sociopaths. Enforcing the existing laws won't stop them either.

A bullet shot from a law abiding and permitted citizen is another matter.

I'm not advocating stupid laws like Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law (you only need "to feel threatened and in fear" to give you the legal right to use deadly force) but I wish that a well trained, sane, armed citizen had been present at any of those massacres.

Political knee-jerk reactions are the only sure thing to come out of these very sad situations.

Gun ownership should be restricted to police and the military and everyone else caught with a gun should go to prison.