Originally Posted by p7fan (Post 3068724)

The idea of arming teachers is out. One word-- LIABILITY...
My wife is a middle school teacher. She is also deadly with a 1911a1.
The regs teachers have these days is crazy. I have a buddy who teaches educational law (at a doctoral level), some of the rules within the school systems are crazy. The inmates run the asylum....

Originally Posted by MS Fowler (Post 3068718)

Look up the definition of "infringe". Everything you propose infringes on the right to keep and bear arms. What you consider "adjustments" are actually infringements.

Originally Posted by Air&Road (Post 3068754)

So then who gets to decide what is a legitimate infringement? You?:confused:

Originally Posted by JamesDean (Post 3068760)

I suppose in this case, should some bill be created, the a majority of votes in:

The House
The Senate

ANDDDDD

wait for it

wait for it

The President, BARACK OBAMA.

There it is.

Obama is now in the thread.

Originally Posted by Air&Road (Post 3068711)

Since you read everything so closely, PLEASE show me where I have directly blamed what this nut did in Connecticutt on anyone in Washington DC....... I'm waiting..........

Originally Posted by MS Fowler (Post 3068718)

Look up the definition of "infringe". Everything you propose infringes on the right to keep and bear arms. What you consider "adjustments" are actually infringements.

Originally Posted by dropnosky (Post 3068850)

sure. Whats the problem with that?

Any move to regulate and control gun sales and restrict certain weapons is not condoned by the amendment, which as stated, is pretty bald.

Im sure the founding fathers would be surprised at that, but im also sure the founding fathers would be surprised at just how many mass shooting events we are prepared to tolerate this day and age before even marginally altering a 200 year old amendment.

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel (Post 3068851)

My guess is they would be aghast at what they created...

Originally Posted by engatwork (Post 3068891)

In reading up on the story it sounds like the mom knew that there were issues with the kid. Years ago Georgia had a mental hospital where ppl that had mental issues lived. Not sure why it was closed down but the ppl that lived there were set free.

Originally Posted by dropnosky (Post 3068533)

on this we agree, but many of the compromises on the table are not discussing limiting weapons ownership, but placing restrictions and methods of tracking them, and even small changes are rejected, meaning that the flooded situation will continue as it has without even an attempt, and who knows, the next one could be the crazy relative jplinville described breaking into his house, taking his gun, and shooting a bunch of people.

Any effect would be a good effect, even in you completely halted the manufacture of certain types of guns and cut off selling them to people, thats something that could be done. There are a million ways we could do something to improve control and regulation.

I personally think that things like no waiting period gun show sales should be forbidden, and ammunition should not be saleable without demostrated proof of gun ownership in that exact caliber.

Originally Posted by jplinville (Post 3068936)

The crazy relative would have to travel nearly 300 miles to get to my house...no chance of that happening.

As for demonstratable proof of ownership of a certain caliber gun, are you suggesting that you show up at the place of ammunition sale with your firearm?? That begging for more problems...

Originally Posted by MS Fowler (Post 3068617)

Most of those who favor big-government solutions for all problems want to be judged on their ( stated) intentions, and never on the results.
Restrictive guns laws are but one example. As Brian has continually pointed out CT already HAS among the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Did those restrictions help? Evidence would suggest they did not. Whether they promoted an easy target is arguable, but laws did not stop the killing.
What evidence is there that laws stop bad behavior? Writing bad checks is illegal--and still people do it. Robbing banks is illegal, and still people do it. Identity theft is illegal, and people still do it. Public drunkenness and public urination are illegal, and people still do those things, too.
Sometimes laws do have the desired effect. Marijuana use is illegal, and always has been wherever I have lived, and for that reason, alone, I have refrained from it. But I am a law-abiding citizen. There are still people who use (illegally) Marijuana all over this country. Laws do not generally stop law-breakers from doing what they decide to do.
I wonder how much society would change if we erased all laws from the books--law abiding/ caring for others--like all of us here on PP--would continue to behave pretty much as we do. The law-breakers would continue to behave as they do.

Passing laws will not make bad people act like good people.