Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
Do knives misfire or jam?   Perhaps the kid pulls the trigger, the gun jams and he simply takes an assbeating from the wrestling team.

It's dumb to say "Yeah, he stabbed 20 but, with a gun, he'd have killed three!!!" with any certainty.   The kid wasn't ex-Seal Team Six. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 10:34:00 AM (view original):
If you're found to have withheld information regarding your son's mental illness, in order to get a gun, make it so that you're never allowed to legally get a gun moving forward.  And improve how we deal with mental illness, so that we encourage people to get help for themselves and loved ones.  

I understand there are no easy answers here.  I just wanted to say something when you argued that it really didn't matter much whether this kid had a gun or not.  If gun laws prevented him from having a gun that day, that's a good thing, because there's a higher probability that someone/many people would have died that day if he had one.

I think you missed the point.    She already had guns before his mental issues were discovered.   Would she have to surrender her guns?   If so, and she hides her son's problems, doesn't he still access the guns and do what he did?   Again, tying gun ownership to people who might have a way to access them, but not own them, is complicated.

I don't think one can argue that if he had a gun that the outcome would have been much worse.    Maybe it would have been, maybe it wouldn't have.   That's a dumb argument to make.

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 2:19:00 PM (view original):
He assumes that people have the same survival reflexes as he does and could dodge bullets.

Posted by tecwrg on 4/11/2014 2:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
Do knives misfire or jam?   Perhaps the kid pulls the trigger, the gun jams and he simply takes an assbeating from the wrestling team.

It's dumb to say "Yeah, he stabbed 20 but, with a gun, he'd have killed three!!!" with any certainty.   The kid wasn't ex-Seal Team Six. 

What an incredibly stupid and disingenuous argument.  Did the Sandy Hook shooter have elite paramilitary training?  If so, I must have missed that.

Unless you really believe what you're saying.

I'd like to give you more credit than that.

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 2:22:00 PM (view original):
You and 19 of your closest friends and family are in a room.  A crazed man with a weapon appears.  Would you rather the weapon be a gun or a knife?

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 2:22:00 PM (view original):
You and 19 of your closest friends and family are in a room.  A crazed man with a weapon appears.  Would you rather the weapon be a gun or a knife?

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 3:05:00 PM (view original):
Anyway, I have no issue with tighter gun laws and stiffer penalties for unregistered guns.  The govt could pass a law today requiring that every firearm you possess must be registered in 30 days.    And they could issue jail time to anyone possessing an unregistered gun on day 31 without a word of complaint from me.   They could confiscate guns from anyone who is trying to register their gun if they don't meet the new requirements and I'm not griping. 

But it's pointless to argue with anyone who says "That idiot in PA would have killed people if he had a gun!!!" because that's a dumb argument.    We don't know.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 3:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 2:22:00 PM (view original):
You and 19 of your closest friends and family are in a room.  A crazed man with a weapon appears.  Would you rather the weapon be a gun or a knife?

I'll use the same logic I used with tec.   If you want to argue gun control, please do.   But don't create scenarios that don't exist.   WHAT IF I HAD A NUCLEAR WARHEAD FROM WAL-MART!?!?!?!  IN THAT CASE, I DON'T CARE WHAT THIS CRAZED MAN HAS!!!!   I JUST DETONATE MY WARHEAD AND TAKE OUT THE ENTIRE BLOCK!!!!!!

Unlikely.   He had a gun that I'd have no problem restricting ownership with very tight gun laws.    But this kid in PA didn't have a gun.   I don't know that he'd have killed anyone with a firearm.   But you and tec do.   How many would he have killed if he had the same type of gun as Lanza?  I'm sure you and tec know.

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 3:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 3:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 2:22:00 PM (view original):
You and 19 of your closest friends and family are in a room.  A crazed man with a weapon appears.  Would you rather the weapon be a gun or a knife?

I'll use the same logic I used with tec.   If you want to argue gun control, please do.   But don't create scenarios that don't exist.   WHAT IF I HAD A NUCLEAR WARHEAD FROM WAL-MART!?!?!?!  IN THAT CASE, I DON'T CARE WHAT THIS CRAZED MAN HAS!!!!   I JUST DETONATE MY WARHEAD AND TAKE OUT THE ENTIRE BLOCK!!!!!!

I'll take your non-answer as "no preference."  Natural selection, I guess, is a good thing then.

Posted by burnsy483 on 4/11/2014 3:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2014 3:05:00 PM (view original):
Anyway, I have no issue with tighter gun laws and stiffer penalties for unregistered guns.  The govt could pass a law today requiring that every firearm you possess must be registered in 30 days.    And they could issue jail time to anyone possessing an unregistered gun on day 31 without a word of complaint from me.   They could confiscate guns from anyone who is trying to register their gun if they don't meet the new requirements and I'm not griping. 

But it's pointless to argue with anyone who says "That idiot in PA would have killed people if he had a gun!!!" because that's a dumb argument.    We don't know.

The likelihood of fatalities is much higher.  I never said anything would or would not happen.