Oregon Community College Shooting - What law (if any) could have prevented it?

[Nick M]

A better analogy is this: We can't stop nations from getting nuclear weapons, therefore every nation should have nuclear weapons, and lots of them!

Invalid....Imagine that. If you want to compare, fine. Do it all the way. Iran wants to murder. If they do, they are executed the same as a murderer in America.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I work at a community college and we have two armed police officers on duty. I would be on board with this idea.

Stable veteran marksmen would be better then poorly trained cops. Perhaps an internal terrorist defence department( homeland security) should train and post people for this specific purpose. The death of innocent children is inexcusable.

 

[Quetzal]

Stable veteran marksmen would be better then poorly trained cops. Perhaps an internal terrorist defence department( homeland security) should train and post people for this specific purpose. The death of innocent children is inexcusable.

Not a bad idea either. Offers job outlets as well.

 

[Alate_One]

okay and what should the "old" interpretation imply for the current gun ownership, in other words according to the "old" interpretation, what laws can't be passed and are there any limits on the laws that can be passed.

We don't know for sure because the decision is not that old.

What did happen is regulations banning handguns in DC and mandating trigger locks on all firearms were struck down.

Now perhaps those were overly extreme, but a standalone handgun ban was struck down two years later in Chicago that had existed for a long time.

As far as limits I think it's reasonable to say as long as the second amendment is there, you shouldn't be able to ban all firearms in the USA. But you should be able to ban particular types or at least restrict them to people that have gone through considerable training.

That's what I would most like to see, people asked to go through a background check and some amount of training before owning handguns especially, but perhaps other weapons as well. Law abiding citizens should be willing to do that. We ask that drivers be trained, why not gun owners?

 

[Alate_One]

Invalid....Imagine that. If you want to compare, fine. Do it all the way. Iran wants to murder. If they do, they are executed the same as a murderer in America.

Are you under the delusion that every murderer is executed? Or even caught and convicted?

Problem is if everyone has nuclear weapons, the threat of self destruction goes up, not down as does the rate of gun related deaths with the number of guns.

 

[PureX]

Well I'm with Charming Manc really except I see how impossible it would be to disarm America now.

That being the case then everybody needs to be armed...it does seem strange I know but I point out the fact that in the days of the wild west death by gunshot was more rare than people think.

At the moment these shooters go for soft targets, that in itself tells you that if the people were armed the shooters would be deterred.

Always remember this, it is a fact.

People who get a buzz out of inflicting pain and terror are themselves afraid of the same pain and terror they afflict on others.

But we don't need to disarm america. We just need to identify those among us that can't be trusted to own or use firearms, and then take steps to keep them from getting any. It's not that difficult a problem, or that difficult of a solution. But first we need to stop thinking and acting like insane people about this issue, and we need start thinking and acting rationally. Solving the gun violence problem in this country is not going to be achieved by putting even more guns in the hands of even more people. That's insanity.

 

[Lon]

Leftist democrats -- a redundancy -- would block and kill any proposed legislation seeking it. A good number of GOP would could do so as well, or vote for it only after it's certain to be defeated.

Agree. It is mho, that you have a right to free speech but I don't have need to hear gossip or other things that don't affect me. If you are telling me about it in the news, there should be a very good reason for me to hear about it, else it is just gossip that glorifies the shooter. It is tragic, and I can pray for victim's and their families, but 'prayer' doesn't seem to be a news channel goal. "Something" else does seem to be...

We can't always pinpoint motivations, but sometimes we certainly can. This sort of news information should be somewhat filtered, if not internally, then thrust upon them. Media shouldn't be mindlessly reporting all happenings without taking responsibility for that information. "Bullying" is free speech, but it carries consequences. News media, similarly, is free to speak, but they should be implicated when $$$ is their only reason for saying something.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The plotted points on the graph shows mathematically that there is no correlation between the % of population legally possessing firearms and the number of murders per 100,000 population.

Some moron drew a line in the graph to try to mislead people into thinking there was a correlation.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What law could have prevented it?

--Amendment to the Constitution repealing or amending the Second Amendment.

My proposal was to restore the Militia mentioned in the Second Amendment.
Right now, the Second Amendment is not being applied in the manner intended by the authors.

Which of you have actually READ the second amendment?

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.

I have read it.

Notice the bit about regulation and militia. Now for some reason the supreme court decided in 2008 and 2010 (against longstanding precedent) that this meant people have an individual right to bear arms (activist court anyone)? But it's pretty obvious regulation is perfectly permissible and was intended and been enacted from the start of the nation.

The individual right to bear arms is an important part of having a well regulated militia.
The militia is comprised of all able-bodied people between the ages of 16 and 60.
Each person in the militia must provide their own weapons of warfare and be ready to be called into duty.
Therefore the individual right to bear arms is vital to having a well regulated militia.
The only thing missing is the individual states mandating that all able-bodied people between the ages of 16 and 60 must be armed and providing a command structure for them.

 

[genuineoriginal]

If you're intent on excluding suicide from a debate like this, why? Are those lives less meaningful than anyone else's?

The people that committed suicide obviously believed that their lives were less meaningful than anyone else's.

 

[This Charming Manc]

The issue is viewed in content of overall murder rates and international murder rates, its misleading.

The good news both Americans and brits are significantly less likely to be murdered than we were 20 years ago, that's by guns, axes, poison, cars, or darleks.

The number of guns in US society does not effect that downward trend on me way or another.

The difference is in the level of murder specifically gun murder rates, the shape of the stats is very much the same.

Understanding context gives most stats meaning.

Picking two correlating pieces of data at points that best show the point you always wanted to make usually gives a distorted perception.

Ok not quite the graph I described but you see the trends

That will be shrugged off as irrelevant by a few chart-citers here.

 

[ok doser]

:think:

 

[CabinetMaker]

God gave us a commandment - You shall not murder. I believe that there is no higher law than those God Himself gave us. If God's law is not enough to stop us from murdering, then no law man can make can prevent murder either.

Laws can only prevent things to the extent that people are willing to obey the laws. In general, laws only give society a way to punish wrong doing.

 

[PureX]

The people that committed suicide obviously believed that their lives were less meaningful than anyone else's.

People who commit suicide should be included in the gun violence stats because guns make suicide far, far faster and easier to do. Just as they make killing any human for any reason far, far faster and easier to do.

My friend Jay says that anyone who thinks guns don't kill people should never, ever be allowed near one. And I get his point. Thinking that guns don't kill people is INSANE thinking!

 

[ok doser]

My friend Jay says that anyone who thinks guns don't kill people should never, ever be allowed near one. And I get his point. Thinking that guns don't kill people is INSANE thinking!

do cars kill?

do fires kill?

do falls in the bathtub kill?

 

[jeffblue101]

People who commit suicide should be included in the gun violence stats because guns make suicide far, far faster and easier to do. Just as they make killing any human for any reason far, far faster and easier to do.

My friend Jay says that anyone who thinks guns don't kill people should never, ever be allowed near one. And I get his point. Thinking that guns don't kill people is INSANE thinking!

again not true, are you even paying attention to the chart that I posted, is your adherence to liberalism blinding you from the truth. suicides occur in far greater numbers in countries with a lot of gun control laws. If what you said were even remotely true, than countries that have a very high gun ownership rates would have visibly higher suicide rates. we don't see that from the chart below, therefore it is justified to remove suicides from gun death totals since these people would merely substitute their method of harming themselves for something else.

 

[genuineoriginal]

People who commit suicide should be included in the gun violence stats because guns make suicide far, far faster and easier to do.

Then you might as well add automobile accidents to the statistics for gun violence, since driving a car makes a lot of things faster and easier to do.

Just as they make killing any human for any reason far, far faster and easier to do.

Isn't it amazing that a weapon created to make killing men and beasts faster and easier does what it was created to do?

My friend Jay says that anyone who thinks guns don't kill people should never, ever be allowed near one. And I get his point. Thinking that guns don't kill people is INSANE thinking!

Yes, which is why the NRA should change the wording of their gun safety rules and replace language like "cause injury" with "kill".

 

[genuineoriginal]

do cars kill?

do fires kill?

do falls in the bathtub kill?

Were cars, fires, and bathtubs created with the intent to make killing faster and easier?

 

[ok doser]

Were cars, fires, and bathtubs created with the intent to make killing faster and easier?

beats me

why?

does that matter?

 

[genuineoriginal]

beats me

why?

does that matter?

Yes, because we have been talking about whether gun control laws can prevent people from using guns to kill people.
Since guns were specifically designed to make killing of people and beasts faster and easier, asking about people dying from cars, fires, and bathtubs is not on topic since none of them were specifically designed to make killing faster and easier.