So, do tell us – so long as it is not a gun in every classroom which we already heard about, of course – what is your solution? How would you stop the disenchanted from making bombs, picking up their guns and planning a massacre?

Just a thought, but do the family of mass-killing gunman ever want the weaponry back?

Allow guns in every class room.

Perhaps putting the insane back into the asylums the liberal freed them from may help but then liberals control the press and Washington right now so that is not going to happen.

As for your last moronic quip, do not know, do not care.

If it makes you busy bodies feel any better, the latest round of mass attacks have been stabbings.
The most recent attacker was shot dead by University Police.

Here is one for any twit who cannot figure out why blurting out the name of the killer repeatedly 24/7 is moronic at best.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/03/us/minnesota-foiled-school-massacre-john-ladue/

Just an idea…. Whilst it wouldn’t infringe the 2nd, in any way, why not just BAN carrying any Firearm in public places?.
Jim

Lincoln .7

It would infringe:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

PM me your mailing details.

Rpr I wonder whoever said the USA wa a civilized society? Perhaps you could enlighten me? Having the experience of training with the US armed Forces while in the Parachute Regiment some years ago their answer was spray everything with bullets in the hope of hitting the enemy. The UK approach was find the target and hit it. Americans tend to panic British Soldiers do not(perhaps we could not afford the thousands of rounds)

So instead of trying to defuse a situation it is a situation of cacking your pants or shooting. The gun is a way of resolving a situation rather than trying to sort matters out peacefully. Give up your weapons or at least make it impossible for those under 30 to obtain one(it might make it more difficult for nut jobs to obtain them) My personal opinion is we share a (almost) common language and little else. As an afterthought this does not go for all Americans there are decent ones out their but in the minority!

RpR I believe you to be one to scared to live without a gun. Reply if you like but I am not the least interested in you cr*p

What ever floats your boat son.

A little balance – it does happen over here – but this incident is big news. I suspect it wouldn’t even raise an eyebrow in the USA:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-34513093

RpR – your inherent paranoia, and that of a proportion of your countrymen, does you no credit. Violent crime can be reduced, and should be reduced in a civilized society. The time will come when there is a ban on handguns in your country. In my opinion, its time to start the discussion of what form gun ownership will take thereafter. Putting your hands over your ears and making Laa, Laa noises wont stop anything.

Hmm, you are the one who has problems with the firearm ownership in the U.S., so for a paranoid person you simply have to look in a mirror.

Hell will freeze before the U.S. become the Erewhon you describe, or maybe horror of horrors it will become an Erewhon which is even worse.
———————————————————-

Moggy:
I used that site as it was the most recent I could find easily.

Sites that logged homicides world wide had a five year difference depending on country, while trying to find anything not at least three years old was impossible.
If you took the time to slog through gun violence statistics in the U.S. you will find they all present similar stats to the one I posted.

Even police admit. if one eliminates ghetto criminal killing ghetto criminal, murder stats in the U.S. drop considerably.
At the same time police I have had a conversation with say goblin killing goblin murders rarely cause the waste of time a serious investigation would be.

This PDF, if you go down to table 10 page 4 gives gov. firearm death stats from 2013 as being 11,208.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

So they resorted to denigrating his sexuality, political view and voting habits without mentioning his colour – all things that have nothing to do with the actual story since he was feeling picked on by his former employer and ex-colleagues. Have you ever wondered why they try to pull this sort of distraction out and what they don’t want you to see instead?

Wondered no, realized why, probably.

How, exactly? The right slag off anyone who isn’t Fox News, and Fox News run down anyone slightly to the left of their political median. There isn’t much of a political left wing in America, which is reflected by the political views of the news media there. All in all hardly free of bias.

I put two sites that expose the left wing bias of major news networks.
If you do not accept it, so be it.

Banning guns would definitely have reduced the overall death toll, but that is not something that will be seriously entertained until somebody makes a stand. Or are the national/local authorities not responsible for maintaining a safe and secure society for all?
Who got your sympathy – the shooter or the grieving relatives who want guns banned?

Neither as I do not fake sympathy for person I do not know even though I would prefer it did not happen.
This is a commentary from liberal journalist where even he sees the absurdity of anti-firearms liberals.

http://www.startribune.com/thought-experiment-could-gun-prohibition-work/331835721/

Here is how he ends his article:
Now, for the moment, let’s set aside the political (and legal) obstacles such a project might face. My purpose here is simply to return to the question of the limits of government’s enforcement powers *— to invite readers to think about how successfully government really could enforce what would amount to a kind of gun prohibition.

It’s not impossible to imagine problems. Just as it might be toilsome to round up 11 million illegal immigrants, just rounding up guns already in circulation in America might be a bit of a chore. Obama noted that “there is a gun for roughly every man, woman, and child in America.”

OK, 320 million guns, give or take. Let’s get started. Confiscate (or buy back) 100,000 guns a day, every day, all year long, and after four long years — you still wouldn’t have half of them off the streets.

What staffing would that program require? What kind of enforcement tactics might be needed?

Is there any chance that a profitable black market in illegal guns — rather like the drug trade — might develop in response to firearm prohibition? Is violence imaginable as rivalries arise for control of the lucrative illegal gun trade? Might there be corruption, or a deterioration in respect for the law? Might a few small-time gun dealers or nonviolent gun owners land in prison?

Well, it’s worth some thought, even though we’re not likely to test the practicality of gun prohibition anytime soon.

And this thought experiment isn’t just for frustrated supporters of gun control. Those readers who can most vividly picture all of the impossibilities in a gun crackdown might want to ask themselves whether their thinking about, say, immigration enforcement has been equally skeptical and tough-minded.

All of our debates might improve through a commitment to a bit more consistency and care in thinking ideas through.

Hey, you were the one who wanted to defend dead children. Live children do need defending, — That is one of the most asinine statements anyone could ever make without exception.
Only you are locked onto the already dead children whereas all my statements concerned that which could/should have been done when they were still alive.
YOU are trying to twist it into a post-mortem only factor.

Hmm, the right to bear arms or the right to a safe education?

Right to bear arms so there can be a safe education.
I know dozens of people who have multiple firearms, some who carry loaded firearms, as civilians, and none of them has ever used a firearm illegally even though some of you seem to think that possessing a firearm automatically means one will kill anyone but the criminal.
I would have defended living children,you are the one only speaking about them after they were murdered even though the school boards action before the shooting is one reason they are dead.

If it gets to the point that you have nothing left– (ONLY YOU are trying to box this into a either or matter when in a country of 300 plus million that is a silly notion BUT you and too many liberal school boards seem to think that armed guards and teachers is equally bad to dead students, bizarre)-– but guards with guns fighting nutters with guns in a school then there is something really wrong with that society and you are just letting them win, whether they live or die. But if it gets to that point then there will already be dead students on the ground anyway – your guards can’t be everywhere all the time.

Only in your mind.

You can’t answer, can you. I’ll ask again: tell us where else there is even a remotely similar number of massacres in a country regarded as civilised.

As a massacre is the indiscriminate slaughter of people, any country south of us but then those countries have some of the toughest gun laws in the world.
Go figure.
Or do you have some elitist definition of civilized.
We are a free country and with that comes a price which does not bother me.

Simple questions are simple, biased questions are a biased farce based on a preconceived base.
If you from either ignorance or arrogance cannot figure out why the names of murderers, who stated in left behind writing, they wanted to go out in a blaze of glory are no longer repeated till one wants to puke, especially the families of the victims, then you are a hopeless moron.

According to you everywhere in America is dangerous — (show me where I said that. every where is equally dangerous and that means illegal weapons can be attained equally everywhere? If you cannot then that is only the result of your ignorant bias that tries to twist the realities of this country into some simplistic liberal cartoon..) —so I’d imagine we all assumed that illegal weapons can be obtained everywhere.
But are they illegal because they are unregistered or smuggled in, or have they been stolen and been sold on?

How they became illegal I really could not care less, nor could I know.
Your imaginations is only exceeded by your simplistic arrogance but even though you are ignorant your rhetoric speaks as if you know more about living in the U.S. than one who has spent ones entire life here.
Such imaginations are ignorant babble based on ignorance fed by arrogance which is why this discussion is over.

You know nothing of living here, whether in the country where your nearest neighbor is over ten miles away or in a big city where ten illegal immigrants live a two-person run down apartement.
You can make your silly statements based on either a preconceived a lack of knowledge, or silly news headlines and if it makes you feel better, make them as outrageous as you wish.

Just seen this:
Some students are angry that they can be reprimanded by their university for bringing sex toys on campus, but not for carrying concealed guns.
It has, of course, been ridiculed by gun campaigners – see the story.

So what?
Children can and now have been suspended from public grade schools for pointing fingers like a gun, have a gun trinket on a trinket bracelet, cutting a pop tart into the shape of a pistol and pointing it at some one.
Also violent sports such as tag, kickball, dodge ball etc. have been banned from unsupervised play with acceptable sports, picked by the school board only allowed.

For you to think students carry a firearm to stay alive is in the same category as *****s, much less the ignorant twits doing the protest, hmm, are you related to people on the school boards that think tag is a violent sport but that arming teachers or guards to save children from murder is improper thought?
As I said you and some others posting here know absolutely nothing about life in any part of the U.S. of A. and magnify that point with your rhetoric.

The only thing more stupid than that ***** rule is the asinine comparison of the protest

Hands up all those who believe that RpR doesn’t want a world where he doesn’t ‘apparently’ need to have a gun to feel safe.

Somebody tell him the zombie apocalypse isn’t going to happen…!

I live in the real world where people die from violent crime.
A person in my home town plead guilty to accidentally beating a man to death and burning the body, this week.
A few miles from where I am now another gent admitted shooting another man to death this week and a few months ago a man was convicted of deliberately drowning his eight year old son.

Just a few incidents that do not happens in the fantasy land you people seem to live in.
If you live in such an idyllic world for heavens sake stay there, the real world I live in will devour your for breakfast and **** you out by lunchtime.