Why don't we have the same level of gun violence here?

[Impish]

*haven't read all the replies*

 

According to statistics cited in a recent article, per population, we're actually on about par when it comes to gun violence.

[swellmomma]

Lock down drills definitely aren't just a Canadian thing. I don't know any school here that doesn't do those same drills. Sandy Hook followed their lock down procedure and 20 kids still died. Practicing those drills doesn't really do anything once a gunman gets inside. He either takes his own life before killing everyone or the police get him first.

 

I would like to see the violence statistics as well that take into account the differing population sizes.

 

 

Or in the instance of the Taber school shooting a teacher takes him down. In the taber instance, the wrestling coach had the gunman on the ground and disarmed before police even got into the building. The gunman went to jail for his crime.

 

I am not saying that lockdowns are the end all be all, I was answering what the schools here would do.

 

I am saying however that we have had 1 school shooting 13 years ago, the one before that was in 1979 (not counting college shooting here), so lockdowns aren't what is protecting the kids, lack of access to guns is though. Yes bad guys hell bent on getting their hands on a gun will still find a way. But I strongly believe that the vast majority of shootings (school and otherwise) are because guns are handy, they are a weapon of opportunity. In Canada even if you have guns in teh home (and because of hunters I know many that do), the guns are locked unloaded in 1 case, the ammo is locked in a separate case often in a different room. The keys to those things are kept on the body of the owner or very well hidden too. The majority of gun owners I know have hunting rifles, they aren't keeping semi automatic weapons in their home. They do not have handguns in their night stand drawer, or a shoebox in teh closet or anywhere else homeowners put them with thoughts that they will keep them safe. Kids do not have access to those weapons, so they are not bringing them to school in a backpack to show off, or using them to shoot up a school in some revenge plan.

 

Add into it what was posted about mental health services here in Canada. I have a son with mental health issues. If I thought he was a danger to himself or others I could have the police or EMTs take him to the hospital to be held for 24 hour observation, if they felt he was still a risk they would commit him for a longer timeline for further observation. I have had 2 of my kids in hospital for 3 week inpatient assessments. In those cases it was not a crisis situation so we did wait for a bed to open up, but if it had been a crisis they would have been in immediately.

 

The Canadian system is not perfect, I have not seen a single Canadian say that it is. But there is things very different from the American system that I think do help reduce the likelyhood of a school shooting.

[Canadianmumof5]

Hi~ did the statistics you mention compare numbers based strictly on the number of deaths per nation, per capita, per one thousand people, etc.? This basis of comparison is important to know, as the USA has almost ten times the population of Canada. ( Population of USA: 314,976,056 vs. Population of Canada: 33,476,688)

 

Thanks!

 

 

The numbers came from a link posted on page 1 of the thread. They were absolute numbers,

Totally agree that we need to account for the population factor.

But just as a quick reference - Canada has had 28 deaths from school shootings in over 110 years. The US had 240 deaths from school shootings from 1992-2000. The per capita is still a lot higher in the US; which is what I was originally trying to understand when I posted.

[Punks in Ontario]

My husband's employer does business in Canada. Maybe that would be an in.

 

Although, it's cold in Canada isn't it? Brrrrr...NY is cold enough.

 

Depends on where. Here in Ontario, it's likely milder. More than likely less snow!

[Punks in Ontario]

Sorry I just lost your quotes. For personal use I figure that the Can. Pop is 1/9 of the US.

 

A couple of other thoughts on culture: Canada does not have nearly as violent a history. We've never fought a war of independence or a civil war unless you count theRed Rive Rebellion as one. We have a much smaller armed forces per capita than theUSas well. I'm always surprised at how many of you have served.

 

Yes, population densityisoften lower.

 

Many of the people living in rural areas do have long guns that maybe used for varmint control or hunting. You do NOT transport them anywhere generally. They are always locked up unless in use. Our culture is not showy.

 

Yes, we still have illegal handguns, usually brought from the States. Yes we have gang elements in some cities with thebut it's just not allowed for anyone to carry aha dun.

 

My guys are I awe when we go south roses all the weapons for sale. Only intheUS were they able to fire areal handgun or see an assault reifle up close.

[Canadianmumof5]

I definitely understand this. Nobody likes to have people from other countries ask us what's wrong with our country. I didn't take it that way, but it could be taken that way for sure.

 

I didn't ask the original question in order to be bashing anyone or their country. So sorry if that is how it was interpreted.

[Joker]

I also wonder about easy access and what's changed in our society. I grew up in a home with a loaded weapon and a gun rack for hunting rifles with ammo underneath. None were locked up but we never played with them. I had two brothers and one sister. Almost every home I went to in my hometown was the same way, as were my grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. There was only one accidental shooting in my town in my entire time there (pretty much birth to 20, which was late 70s to late 90s). Crime was non-existent. The occasional robbery and fight, but nothing major. The neighboring towns were the same way. We knew about guns and gun safety, were comfortable with guns, and didn't use them for play or inappropriately. Some people even drove to school with guns in their gun rack but there was never any school violence. Why was easy access not a problem then, but it is now? What has so drastically changed? Is it really just mental health care? Did my hometown and the neighboring towns just have no one with mental problems? I think the problem is much bigger than just guns and mental health care, but I'm not sure what exactly.

[Jennifer3141]

I'll preface this by saying that we have 13+ guns in this house and all but one are "semi-automatic." The term "assault weapon" needs to be tossed out because it doesn't mean anything!

 

I personally own a few of these but it is DH who shoots them. He does target shooting only. He doesn't hunt and has no desire to kill and/or eat game. And I'm sure as $#$%!# not cleaning a dead animal. DH has allowed our children to use his guns and they like target shooting too. But really, they mostly like just picking up the shells and running around with ear protectors on and spending time with Dad.

 

I don't get the appeal of guns much myself but I do get what appeals to my DH. In order to shoot targets, you have to quiet the rest of your brain and concentrate. He loves that. He hates yoga. Go figure.

 

I am a typical liberal hippy. I did not grow up with guns in my house and I thought they were mostly for rednecks honestly. I acquiesced on the kids handling the guns because it really was the safest way to teach them to be smart about them in the house, And it's worked! One of our cats knocked a gun off of DH's shelves and when the kids saw it on the floor, they came back upstairs SCREAMING their heads off. All of DH's guns have individual locks on them and each one has a seperate key. They are all kept unloaded as well, of course. And every few months, we talk about gun safety with the kids and with each other. I asked DH about how old he was when he went to the woods to shoot tins cans and made homemade firecrackers, etc. And we talked about how different our son is from the little psycho my DH was. :glare:

 

Every one of my neighbors has at least one gun in the home. Most of them hunt deer and/or turkey.

 

As we've found more and more out about the CT killer, I have less and less respect for his mother. It's a good thing she died because I think she would have been vilified by all of us and frankly, she should have been. If it's really true that she was trying to get her son institutionalized for mental illness with violent tendencies, she was massively stupid and irresponsible for not locking up or removing the guns from her home. I don't know why but we always think it's going to happen to someone else. And every time one of these shootings goes on, someone from the community says, "I can't believe this could happen here!" Personally, I love America but my fellow Americans; there are STUPID people everywhere. If the killer's mother had had the guts to call her local police department up and said, "Hey, my son is very mentally ill. I'm trying to get him into an inpatient program but it's taking awhile. And I have several weapons in the home. Can you help me?" the police would have helped. Our local police have free gun locks if you ask. Or they might have helped her remove the guns temporarily to a safe place - maybe the police department or a storage facility or whatever. Someone somewhere would have helped if that idiot had just ASKED.

 

But we are so afraid as a country to limit our access to our guns in any way. I think that fear has to change. I think traveling gun shows need to stop. I think internet purchases of guns and ammunition needs to stop. Everybody buy from your local gun shop guy and he'd better eyeball every single customer. If he feels someone is off a bit, he should feel free to pick up the phone and call a cop. There should probably be a waiting period on all guns. And some sort of psychological testing. But that psychological testing would be a nightmare for our country right now and in the CT case, it wouldn't have helped. The mother owned the weapons, not the kid.

 

I think we need to take the stigma away from mental health and put a WHOLE lot more stigma onto bad gun owners. If you own a gun and your idiot niece or crazy son gets it and shoots someone, as a gun owner you should lose your right to own a weapon FOREVER. If you gun is used in a crime and you failed to do reasonable safety measures to keep your gun out of a lunatic's hands, you should be prosecuted like crazy. I'm getting really sick of these parents with guns in their homes thinking their crazy little special snowflake will never use them inappropriately. I'm sorry your snowflake's a nut but get over it. You kid being a nut should not mean my kid has to dodge bullets in kindergarten. Or worse.

 

I know at least one of the Columbine kids had weapons in the home. What the heck? If my kid withdrew from me and started dressing like some sort of gangster vampire, I'd sure as heck lock up my guns and I'd flipping tell the kid WHY.

 

As much as I despise the NRA, they could do quite a bit to help stigmatize bad gun owners. I would love to see them come out and say, "Hey, what happened in CT was partly the blame of the gun OWNER. She should have been smarter and we are going to lobby to prosecute the wits out of parents who are this dumb."

 

As for why America is so different from other countries, I think quite a bit of it has to do with our founding, which over 200 years later we are still incredibly proud of. We made this country (absent the discussion of the First Nation people already here) by rising up against our ruler and having an armed revolution. We are still in our infancy compared to places like France and Great Britain because we've marginalized the indigineous people who were here for thousands of years first. And we have a huge culture of individuality, which would shock those founding fathers we are so fond of quoting. Add to that mix that we have REALLY messed up mental healthcare in our country, especially for those unable to afford it and you've got a soup capable of exploding every once in awhile.

[justLisa]

 

I didn't ask the original question in order to be bashing anyone or their country. So sorry if that is how it was interpreted.

 

 

No it really wasn't

[justLisa]

Thanks for that Jennifer, I can relate to a lot of that.

[swellmomma]

I also wonder about easy access and what's changed in our society. I grew up in a home with a loaded weapon and a gun rack for hunting rifles with ammo underneath. None were locked up but we never played with them. I had two brothers and one sister. Almost every home I went to in my hometown was the same way, as were my grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. There was only one accidental shooting in my town in my entire time there (pretty much birth to 20, which was late 70s to late 90s). Crime was non-existent. The occasional robbery and fight, but nothing major. The neighboring towns were the same way. We knew about guns and gun safety, were comfortable with guns, and didn't use them for play or inappropriately. Some people even drove to school with guns in their gun rack but there was never any school violence. Why was easy access not a problem then, but it is now? What has so drastically changed? Is it really just mental health care? Did my hometown and the neighboring towns just have no one with mental problems? I think the problem is much bigger than just guns and mental health care, but I'm not sure what exactly.

 

 

Overly simplified(and not the case for all growing up now especially minorities): What has changed is this generation (that I can see based on the people around me)has grown up being told they don't have to follow the rules. No one can do more than ground them, so they get sent to their room to play with all the electronics and toys etc their absentee parents have bought to ward off the guilt they have for raising such an undisiplined child. Back in the 70s, 80s even early-mid 90s, if you screwed up at school the school punishened you, they were still giving the strap back in the 80s at the school I attended, and then the school contacted your parents and you got in even more trouble there. If you screwed up in the community the adults in charge your hollar at you and then march you right back home to your parents where you would be punished. If you screwed up at home you were punished. Parents did not try to be best buddies with their kids.

 

There was always an adult around back then, it might not have been your own parent (I was a latchkey starting at age 9), but then judy across the street was home and she was watching and every parent on the block knew at the end of the night what their kids were up to. People in general knew their neighrbors and looked out for each other. They minded each other's kids and the kids viewed those neighbors with respect and called them Mr. and Mrs. or aunt and uncle. And neighbor Judy would be sure to scold you if she say you messing around with things you shouldn't.

 

We had a crap load less stuff, and spent more time playing outdoors, volunteering, working etc. These days jobs I did at age 9-12 would have me in foster care, or child labor laws coming down on the place of work. Kids are deemed too young to do much of anything, other than play around. Most of us had chores to do each day, or we were watching the younger siblings etc. I babysat my siblings every day, neighborhood kids several times a week starting at age 9. Age 11 I started a volunteer position 5 days a week, 3 hours a day. At 15 it changed to a paying job. We had meaningful relationships with our families, with our community, we had a purpose to our lives and responsibilities to offset the priviledges we earned. Even those of us that should have been, were not psychoanalyzed to death and found a way to become good people/good citizens.

 

Now we have a generation that is lost in so many ways, no connection to much of anything other than their peers and their stuff. Too much priviledge and not enough responsibility. Lack of personal responsibility. They learn from a young age that no one can really discipline them, because then they just call child services and make life unbearable for the family. And not only can the family not discipline them but they refuse to accept little johnny is even deserving of a punishment anyway. They defend their little beasts and let them get away with crap. It starts off with going up the slide at the park (couldn't resist) but then when johnny pushes "oh no not my johnny", then jonny steals "oh not not my johnny", johnny gets into fights in school "oh no that's not johnny, he was bullied", johnny brings a gun to school "oh my johnny was always such a good boy, I don't understand"

 

This of course is not limited to 1 country, this is unfortunately a common 1st world problem as far as I can see. But this sense of entitlement, lack of appropriate response to authority and denial or refusal to acknowledge the difference between right and wrong COMBINED with easy access to guns and lack of mental health services all play a role.

 

We have that in Canada too, we just have better mental health care and restricted access to guns reduce the risk of a shooting attack by little johnny.

[justamouse]

Yes, I do see what you mean. I fully acknowledge that determining who should be restricted from gun ownership is a question fraught with difficulties as well as potential conflicts with civil rights. The question would have to be pondered with appropriate seriousness, and might even prove untenable in all but the most extreme cases. At the end-of-the-day I think we could establish a pretty high bar with a standard along the lines of limiting weapons to those who present an imminent danger to society. Even that would not be easy in practice. I take your point.

 

 

 

Shutting down the asylums was the act of another, not the ACLU, but I don't want to be accused of partisan politics, so I will leave it at that.

 

The ACLU, however, might very well contest limits on banning gun purchases to the mentally ill, as this is their role as a defender of civil liberties.

 

All very reasonable questions. I would think it would be limited to those who are determined by medical experts (with right of review) with judicial approval and review whose mental illness makes them an immanent threat to society. I do not deny for a moment that this would be "easy," nor would I want room for over-reach on the part of the government.

 

You are asking the right questions.

 

Bill

 

 

In all honesty, I think we should take a hard look at reinstating institutions. Then we wouldn't have to worry about if they could have a gun or not. It sounds cruel -- I was a kid when Greystone Park hit the news, I don't know the full extent of the abuses, how it was perpetrated, what regulations were in place and which were broken-- but couldn't we make it better in some way?

 

And, it would help the parents who are living in fear of their kids.

[Dory]

Just thought I'd add my two cents to the conversation and say that I could count on my hands the number of people I know that DON'T own a gun. There is NO long gun registry here, and although there are collectors and people enjoy their guns, it's along the same line as people who show of their new lawn mower or skill saw. In my entire life I only heard of one person getting killed from a shooting in my area and it was an accident. We don't pay taxes for our healthcare in this province either it is free and the only thing I've ever paid out of pocket for is my boys' circumcisions and my counselling and the counselling could have been paid for by the province but that counsellor wasn't a good fit for me.

[Joker]

Swellmomma, I agree with pretty much all of what you said, but when these discussions come up there are usually many who say the parents shouldn't be blamed. If some of the problems are because many aren't parenting the way they used to, then is part of it a parenting problem?

 

I also very much agree that it is hard to let our kids actually grow and mature. One of my dd's middle school teachers called me the other day to tell me that her work and maturity far outshined his other students. That made me happy but also sad because I know she has a long way to go and that dh and I were more responsible and mature at her age than she is now. I worry leaving my dds home alone for any amount of time (worry about someone not liking it and telling) and I was staying home alone at times much younger than either -- they're 13 and 10.

 

I now there are many reasons, but I guess I just don't agree that it's guns and mental health only. I think there are many reasons and we need to be honest and address them all.

[Rosie_0801]

Swellmomma, I agree with pretty much all of what you said, but when these discussions come up there are usually many who say the parents shouldn't be blamed. If some of the problems are because many aren't parenting the way they used to, then is part of it a parenting problem?

 

Is it a mamma wars problem? Back in the day there was no huge deal about admitting your kid wasn't perfect because no one's was. Now, it seems perfection is supposed to be an achievable goal!

[Halcyon]

 

 

But how do we go about doing that? Some people don't have medical records or criminal records that would land them on any "list". And how do we put people on lists, but still maintain their privacy otherwise? Just because someone has a mental illness doesn't mean they are a criminal or ever would be one, and what if the information is used against them in other ways? It's not that simple (not saying you are saying it is simple).

 

You ban private ownership of all guns with very few exceptions which require long and annoying background checks, character references, suitably long waiting period, licensing examinations which include sections on gun storage, gun safety and separation of ammo from weapons, and annual licensing renewals demonstrating that the license holder has held to these conditions. Limit the number of guns that can be owned within a household to three, each of which must be registered and licensed. No assault weapons. No detachable cartridges. And limits on the amount of ammo that can be stored at any one time.

 

Make it hard. You want to own a gun? Fine. But it's not going to be easy. At. All. And you have to prove that you are a responsible, careful, cautious person. Serious pain in the neck for all the law-abiding gun owners out there? You bet. But you know what? If it prevents one more child's death, then deal with it.

 

Seriously.

[Joker]

 

Is it a mamma wars problem? Back in the day there was no huge deal about admitting your kid wasn't perfect because no one's was. Now, it seems perfection is supposed to be an achievable goal!

 

I also agree with this. When/why did it become bad/embarrassing to have an average or non-perfect child?

[Dory]

 

 

You ban private ownership of all guns with very few exceptions which require long and annoying background checks, character references, suitably long waiting period, licensing examinations which include sections on gun storage, gun safety and separation of ammo from weapons, and annual licensing renewals demonstrating that the license holder has held to these conditions. Limit the number of guns that can be owned within a household to three, each of which must be registered and licensed. No assault weapons. No detachable cartridges. And limits on the amount of ammo that can be stored at any one time.

 

Make it hard. You want to own a gun? Fine. But it's not going to be easy. At. All. And you have to prove that you are a responsible, careful, cautious person. Serious pain in the neck for all the law-abiding gun owners out there? You bet. But you know what? If it prevents one more child's death, then deal with it.

 

Seriously.

 

 

There's no way that someone like me could jump through all those hoops and yet it's not safe to not own a gun in this area. Not because of the people but because of the wildlife. I would completely understand there brig some VERY hefty hoops to jump through to carry a handgun or assault rifle. Those are unnecessary to hunting or country living.

[Guest inoubliable]

 

Is it a mamma wars problem? Back in the day there was no huge deal about admitting your kid wasn't perfect because no one's was. Now, it seems perfection is supposed to be an achievable goal!

 

 

I'm definitely not speaking for the U.S. or a world society in general, but what I've noticed around here is almost the opposite. That we, as a society, are supposed to be obliging because Little Johnny and Little Susie are just not getting a fair shake. And to point out that LJ and LS are in the wrong at all is intolerant of their "issues". I know so many parents here who LOVE to fall back on whatever is the cool/popular/new diagnosis of the moment to explain why their kid is a serious little puke with bad manners and no sense of personal responsibility.

[justamouse]

You ban private ownership of all guns with very few exceptions which require long and annoying background checks, character references, suitably long waiting period, licensing examinations which include sections on gun storage, gun safety and separation of ammo from weapons, and annual licensing renewals demonstrating that the license holder has held to these conditions. Limit the number of guns that can be owned within a household to three, each of which must be registered and licensed. No assault weapons. No detachable cartridges. And limits on the amount of ammo that can be stored at any one time.

 

Make it hard. You want to own a gun? Fine. But it's not going to be easy. At. All. And you have to prove that you are a responsible, careful, cautious person. Serious pain in the neck for all the law-abiding gun owners out there? You bet. But you know what? If it prevents one more child's death, then deal with it.

 

Seriously.

 

 

So, you punish the law abiding citizens?

[Spy Car]

 

 

So, you punish the law abiding citizens?

 

 

I'm sure she doesn't see living a society that isn't plagued with terrible gun violence as a punishment. Perhaps she thinks people might come to like not feeling afraid all the time?

 

Look at what our friend Heather wrote after living outside the States for awhile, and how it completely changed her ideas about guns.

 

Bill

[Halcyon]

 

 

There's no way that someone like me could jump through all those hoops and yet it's not safe to not own a gun in this area. Not because of the people but because of the wildlife. I would completely understand there brig some VERY hefty hoops to jump through to carry a handgun or assault rifle. Those are unnecessary to hunting or country living.

 

 

Why couldn't you jump through all those "hoops"? (and they wouldnt be hoops. They would be regulations, laws, put into place to prevent people who shouldn't own guns from owning guns.)

 

A gun is a gun. Whether intended to kill animals or people, all guns can do both, and should be similarly regulated. Sorry if that makes it harder for you. OTOH, I can see a law including provisions that the longer you SAFELY own a gun without incidence, the fewer annual renewal steps you have to go through--does that make sense?

[Halcyon]

 

 

So, you punish the law abiding citizens?

 

 

Why are regulations considered punishments? Why is it so difficult for the individual to recognize that they live in a society with others, and that society deserves, has a RIGHT, to be protected? And for that protection to occur, regulation and laws must be put into place that, while perhaps more difficult for the INDIVIDUAL citizen to deal with, protects the public at large?

[Guest inoubliable]

 

So, you punish the law abiding citizens?

 

 

Not being an a$$ here, but I really don't understand how making guns harder to obtain punishes law abiding citizens. No one has explained to me why they think this. My thinking is that if you make it harder to obtain a gun, and I'm not talking about making it cost prohibitive, then you make a potential gun owner *really* think about that purchase. Really think about where they're going to store that gun and the ammo, really think hard about that purchase at the gun show instead of making an impulse buy, really pay attention to their state's laws if they're going to be tested for their permit.

 

I know it's not the same thing, but it sounds similar IMO to the requirements in place at animal shelters. Hear me out on this. Around here, at least, if you want to adopt a cat or a dog, you have to show proof that you own your own home or that your rental lease allows you to have pets. The shelter staff will call your landlord to confirm that. You have to listen to a 10 - 15 minute talk on the particular pet you're looking at. They tell you what they've observed about that specific animal and what/if they were told anything by previous owners. They talk to you about veterinary care, sometimes breed-specific. They give you pamphlets on medical insurance for your pet and answer questions about it. They go over the spay/neuter requirement and why it's important. They tell you about any dietary issues that animal has (that they know of). They require you to spend a little time, in staff presence, with the animal. And they don't usually give you the okay that day, so that you have time to think it through and make sure that this is what you want to do. I can see some animal lovers who really want to add a furbaby to their family and really knows their stuff about cats/dogs being a bit annoyed at the time spent at the shelter, but I also think that if you're truly committed to adding a furbaby to your family that you'll see the value in the process and understand that the process is in place to make sure that the best matches are made between pet and pet owner. Would not a more involved process of owning a gun weed out some people who maybe shouldn't be owning a firearm and wouldn't people who have guns as a necessity or hobby see the value in that?

[Halcyon]

 

 

I'm sure she doesn't see living a society that isn't plagued with terrible gun violence as a punishment. Perhaps she thinks people might come to like not feeling afraid all the time?

 

Look at what our friend Heather wrote after living outside the States for awhile, and how it completely changed her ideas about guns.

 

Bill

 

 

And this is the key. We "live in a society". And right now, the threat of gun violence, and the REALITY of gun violence, threatens our sense of community, our sense of tranquility and our sense of safety in public settings. To live in a such a society is indeed a PUNISHMENT to all its citizens. To feel that your child might not be safe at school, that a mad gunman might come in with many hundreds of clips and multiple assault weapons--this is not a society that is protecting its citizens or providing them with the comfort and security they need.

 

We live in a society. And sometimes, individuals have to make what they perceive to be sacrifices for the greater good.

[Dory]

 

 

Why couldn't you jump through all those "hoops"? (and they wouldnt be hoops. They would be regulations, laws, put into place to prevent people who shouldn't own guns from owning guns.)

 

A gun is a gun. Whether intended to kill animals or people, all guns can do both, and should be similarly regulated. Sorry if that makes it harder for you. OTOH, I can see a law including provisions that the longer you SAFELY own a gun without incidence, the fewer annual renewal steps you have to go through--does that make sense?

 

 

When we did have long gun registry up here I could even manage to get all the courses done in the right amount of time in order to have my own rifle legally. I think that all those regulations don't really address the problem anyway. If guns were honestly a problem than we would have a lot more shooting around here.

[Joker]

I'm sure she doesn't see living a society that isn't plagued with terrible gun violence as a punishment. Perhaps she thinks people might come to like not feeling afraid all the time?

 

Look at what our friend Heather wrote after living outside the States for awhile, and how it completely changed her ideas about guns.

 

Bill

 

 

What about those of us who have been saved due to having a gun? An intruder broke into my grandfather's house when I was little. He most definitely had nothing good in mind and my grandfather could not have 'taken him'. My gpa held him at gun point until the police arrived. What might have happened had gpa not had that gun? My dad once got him and my older brother out of a bad situation because he had a gun. My dad was doing nothing wrong but was blocked by a car full of 'not very nice people' and had he not had a gun might not have been ok. My bil is a paraplegic, has a gun and lives alone in the country. He's never had to use them but they make him feel safer and I don't think he should have them taken away.

 

I do not, for one second, think the answer is removing all guns. I think there does need to be more gun control, but it shouldn't become something only the wealthy can afford. It also shouldn't start by removing all guns from those who already have them. There are loopholes that need to be closed and I don't feel many need certain types of weapons they already have.

[Melissa in Australia]

Why are regulations considered punishments? Why is it so difficult for the individual to recognize that they live in a society with others, and that society deserves, has a RIGHT, to be protected. And for that protection to occur, regulation and laws must be put into place that, while perhaps more difficult for the INDIVIDUAL citizen to deal with, protects the public at large.

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

 

And there is the view of democracy that I was trying to point out before. Many countries have a democracy where this is the understood norm.

[Dory]

 

 

Not being an a$$ here, but I really don't understand how making guns harder to obtain punishes law abiding citizens. No one has explained to me why they think this. My thinking is that if you make it harder to obtain a gun, and I'm not talking about making it cost prohibitive, then you make a potential gun owner *really* think about that purchase. Really think about where they're going to store that gun and the ammo, really think hard about that purchase at the gun show instead of making an impulse buy, really pay attention to their state's laws if they're going to be tested for their permit.

 

I know it's not the same thing, but it sounds similar IMO to the requirements in place at animal shelters. Hear me out on this. Around here, at least, if you want to adopt a cat or a dog, you have to show proof that you own your own home or that your rental lease allows you to have pets. The shelter staff will call your landlord to confirm that. You have to listen to a 10 - 15 minute talk on the particular pet you're looking at. They tell you what they've observed about that specific animal and what/if they were told anything by previous owners. They talk to you about veterinary care, sometimes breed-specific. They give you pamphlets on medical insurance for your pet and answer questions about it. They go over the spay/neuter requirement and why it's important. They tell you about any dietary issues that animal has (that they know of). They require you to spend a little time, in staff presence, with the animal. And they don't usually give you the okay that day, so that you have time to think it through and make sure that this is what you want to do. I can see some animal lovers who really want to add a furbaby to their family and really knows their stuff about cats/dogs being a bit annoyed at the time spent at the shelter, but I also think that if you're truly committed to adding a furbaby to your family that you'll see the value in the process and understand that the process is in place to make sure that the best matches are made between pet and pet owner. Would not a more involved process of owning a gun weed out some people who maybe shouldn't be owning a firearm and wouldn't people who have guns as a necessity or hobby see the value in that?

 

 

If we had to do all that to adopt a pet up here no one around here would adopt a pet either. Also, the regulations they are talking about would just be some papers to sign and speeches to listen to. It wouldn't take 10-15 min.

[C_l_e_0..Q_c]

There was a horrific mass shooting at a montreal school some time ago... female engineering students were lined up and shot? I can't remember the details.

 

 

While I can understand at an intellectual level why you wouldn't remember the details, this has been a really painful and hurtful comment for me to read, as a survivor of that particular massacre.

 

 

As I said, I understand, you don't know me, it was years ago, you're not personally involved. I get it. But it just got me in the guts, at a primal level. "can't remember the details, and too lazy to google them, not really giving a damn" It's not necessarily what you meant, but to me it came across as incredibly insensitive. After all, you're talking about my friends.

[Caitilin]

Hugs, Cleo. :grouphug:

[Guest inoubliable]

What about those of us who have been saved due to having a gun? An intruder broke into my grandfather's house when I was little. He most definitely had nothing good in mind and my grandfather could not have 'taken him'. My gpa held him at gun point until the police arrived. What might have happened had gpa not had that gun? My dad once got him and my older brother out of a bad situation because he had a gun. My dad was doing nothing wrong but was blocked by a car full of 'not very nice people' and had he not had a gun might not have been ok. My bil is a paraplegic, has a gun and lives alone in the country. He's never had to use them but they make him feel safer and I don't think he should have them taken away.

 

I do not, for one second, think the answer is removing all guns. I think there does need to be more gun control, but it shouldn't become something only the wealthy can afford. It also shouldn't start by removing all guns from those who already have them. There are loopholes that need to be closed and I don't feel many need certain types of weapons they already have.

 

 

I'm not making light of the fact that your grandfather went through what I'm sure was a very scary experience. However. Was the intruder armed? I seem to remember reading an article some time ago that said most intruders are breaking in to steal something. They're interested in getting in, taking whatever, and getting the heck out. In under three minutes, if possible. When I hear stories about intruders, my first thought is that they're probably not armed and they're just looking to grab the Wii or the laptop and then book it, KWIM? So, couldn't you lock yourself in a bedroom and call 911? If the intruder came to the door, yell out that you're armed. Yell out that you've called 911. I'm guessing that the chances are good that they're going to run off. If someone blocked my car and was being an ass, I'd call 911 on my cell phone. If I lived alone in the country and I was concerned about being able to physically defend myself (which seems an odd fear to me to begin with), I'd get a dog. And an alarm system.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that there are alternatives to lock and load.

[justamouse]

Why are regulations considered punishments? Why is it so difficult for the individual to recognize that they live in a society with others, and that society deserves, has a RIGHT, to be protected. And for that protection to occur, regulation and laws must be put into place that, while perhaps more difficult for the INDIVIDUAL citizen to deal with, protects the public at large.

 

 

 

You said ALL guns.

 

Contrary to popular belief, the more the public carries, the lesser the crime. I know everyone keeps saying it ain't so, but that doesn't make the facts change.

 

You ban private ownership of all guns with very few exceptions which require long and annoying background checks, character references, suitably long waiting period, licensing examinations which include sections on gun storage, gun safety and separation of ammo from weapons, and annual licensing renewals demonstrating that the license holder has held to these conditions. Limit the number of guns that can be owned within a household to three, each of which must be registered and licensed. No assault weapons. No detachable cartridges. And limits on the amount of ammo that can be stored at any one time.

 

Make it hard. You want to own a gun? Fine. But it's not going to be easy. At. All. And you have to prove that you are a responsible, careful, cautious person. Serious pain in the neck for all the law-abiding gun owners out there? You bet. But you know what? If it prevents one more child's death, then deal with it.

 

Seriously.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My parents have guns, my brother has guns, my friends have guns, I've shot a machine gun, my cop friends wish more people would carry.

 

Guns aren't ALL of the problem, severely mentally ill people on the streets are.

 

The answer is not to make it harder for law abiding citizens to obtain guns, the answer is to help the mentally ill.

 

I think people who have never been around them see them as this thing that just is evil on its own. An inanimate object can't be evil, only the person using it can be. Those of us who were brought up around them and taught to respect them know that owning one is a great responsibility.

 

We DO live in a society, and we NEED to get mentally ill people who can hurt the public OFF the streets.

 

We need to start asking WHY are there so may more shootings, WHY are more and more people breaking?

 

If we had to do all that to adopt a pet up here no one around here would adopt a pet either. Also, the regulations they are talking about would just be some papers to sign and speeches to listen to. It wouldn't take 10-15 min.

 

 

That's why people don't adopt here, too.

[Guest inoubliable]

If we had to do all that to adopt a pet up here no one around here would adopt a pet either. Also, the regulations they are talking about would just be some papers to sign and speeches to listen to. It wouldn't take 10-15 min.

 

 

Mkay. But, then, that's my point. You can't sit through a 10 - 15 minute session with a staff member to get to know the animal and learn as much as you can about it from people who have been around it? Obviously you don't want a pet badly enough. If you wanted/needed a gun badly enough, you'd not see the value in learning about how to handle it safely? Clean it safely? Store it safely? You'd not see the value in knowing that the drunk jerkbag down the street wouldn't go through all that and so he wouldn't own a gun? That wouldn't make you feel any better?

[Joker]

I'm not making light of the fact that your grandfather went through what I'm sure was a very scary experience. However. Was the intruder armed? I seem to remember reading an article some time ago that said most intruders are breaking in to steal something. They're interested in getting in, taking whatever, and getting the heck out. In under three minutes, if possible. When I hear stories about intruders, my first thought is that they're probably not armed and they're just looking to grab the Wii or the laptop and then book it, KWIM? So, couldn't you lock yourself in a bedroom and call 911? If the intruder came to the door, yell out that you're armed. Yell out that you've called 911. I'm guessing that the chances are good that they're going to run off. If someone blocked my car and was being an ass, I'd call 911 on my cell phone. If I lived alone in the country and I was concerned about being able to physically defend myself (which seems an odd fear to me to begin with), I'd get a dog. And an alarm system.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that there are alternatives to lock and load.

 

 

My gpa was not only protecting himself but my sister and I who were there. This guy was nuts and only stopped trying to come in when gpa pointed the gun at him. Gpa lived in the country and it took a while for police to show up. He did yell out, but some people are hopped up on junk and just don't care. The gun made him stop and care.

 

My dad and brother were in their bad situation before cell phones were around. My dad got them both out of the situation and they were safe. My dad said he had never been so scared, which tells me a lot.

 

My bil is doing what he feels he needs to feel safe. He does have animals, but I've never been in his situation and it's not for me to tell him he doesn't need a gun to feel safe. I also don't think it's an odd fear considering he ended up a paraplegic due to violence. He was attacked. He was unarmed and unable to defend himself, and now he is disabled and doesn't want to be in that situation again.

[KungFuPanda]

 

 

 

While I can understand at an intellectual level why you wouldn't remember the details, this has been a really painful and hurtful comment for me to read, as a survivor of that particular massacre.

 

 

As I said, I understand, you don't know me, it was years ago, you're not personally involved. I get it. But it just got me in the guts, at a primal level. "can't remember the details, and too lazy to google them, not really giving a damn" It's not necessarily what you meant, but to me it came across as incredibly insensitive. After all, you're talking about my friends.

 

 

She's not insensitive. You are hypersensitive, and with good reason.

[Dory]

 

 

Mkay. But, then, that's my point. You can't sit through a 10 - 15 minute session with a staff member to get to know the animal and learn as much as you can about it from people who have been around it? Obviously you don't want a pet badly enough. If you wanted/needed a gun badly enough, you'd not see the value in learning about how to handle it safely? Clean it safely? Store it safely? You'd not see the value in knowing that the drunk jerkbag down the street wouldn't go through all that and so he wouldn't own a gun? That wouldn't make you feel any better?

 

No I'd feel better if I knew that the drunk jerk bag was being helped or punished in some way for being a drunk jerk bag, not that I was being punished for him being a drunk jerk bag.

[Dory]

There's a reason why Alberta got rid of long gun registry. It doesn't help and it just makes more paperwork for those that are law abiding and those that don't care simply don't register. An extra law just made for a thriving under the table market.

[Guest inoubliable]

No I'd feel better if I knew that the drunk jerk bag was being helped or punished in some way for being a drunk jerk bag, not that I was being punished for him being a drunk jerk bag.

 

Say he is being helped. He's in therapy. It's a work in progress. Sometimes he still gets drunk and turns the music up loud at 2 am on a Wednesday morning, revving his Harley in the driveway and loudly yelling at his wife to get her a$$ back in the house. That sounds fun, right? You call the police and they show up in two or three minutes. You wouldn't feel better knowing that he wouldn't own a firearm in those two or three minutes? You wouldn't feel better knowing that he's not going to shoot his poor wife or kids in the time it took a neighbor to wake up and call the police and have them arrive to arrest him or calm him down? C'mon.

 

Still not getting how you're coming to the conclusion that you'd be punished by having to go through the steps that would allow you to have a firearm but would prevent the drunk jerkbag from having one.

[Dory]

 

 

Say he is being helped. He's in therapy. It's a work in progress. Sometimes he still gets drunk and turns the music up loud at 2 am on a Wednesday morning, revving his Harley in the driveway and loudly yelling at his wife to get her a$$ back in the house. That sounds fun, right? You call the police and they show up in two or three minutes. You wouldn't feel better knowing that he wouldn't own a firearm in those two or three minutes? You wouldn't feel better knowing that he's not going to shoot his poor wife or kids in the time it took a neighbor to wake up and call the police and have them arrive to arrest him or calm him down? C'mon.

 

Still not getting how you're coming to the conclusion that you'd be punished by having to go through the steps that would allow you to have a firearm but would prevent the drunk jerkbag from having one.

 

Wouldn't it make more sense then that people with those problems be flagged in some way so that buying a firearm wasn't an option for them?

[Whereneverever]

 

 

Say he is being helped. He's in therapy. It's a work in progress. Sometimes he still gets drunk and turns the music up loud at 2 am on a Wednesday morning, revving his Harley in the driveway and loudly yelling at his wife to get her a$$ back in the house. That sounds fun, right? You call the police and they show up in two or three minutes. You wouldn't feel better knowing that he wouldn't own a firearm in those two or three minutes? You wouldn't feel better knowing that he's not going to shoot his poor wife or kids in the time it took a neighbor to wake up and call the police and have them arrive to arrest him or calm him down? C'mon.

 

Still not getting how you're coming to the conclusion that you'd be punished by having to go through the steps that would allow you to have a firearm but would prevent the drunk jerkbag from having one.

 

Two to three minutes? That's fast! It takes at least 15 mins here. You could totally be eaten by a bear in fifteen mins. ;)

 

I'll also note my state doesn't require a permit, class, or background check to carry a concealed handgun.

[swellmomma]

Why are regulations considered punishments? Why is it so difficult for the individual to recognize that they live in a society with others, and that society deserves, has a RIGHT, to be protected? And for that protection to occur, regulation and laws must be put into place that, while perhaps more difficult for the INDIVIDUAL citizen to deal with, protects the public at large?

 

Which brings us back to something I posted at the start of this thread about the differences between to the 2 societies. Most in Canada think in terms of the greater good, how to make things better for the other people walking around. Many Americans think in terms of the personal good, if not easier/better etc for the individual it is seen as a punishment even when it is for the greater good.

[Joker]

Two to three minutes? That's fast! It takes at least 15 mins here. You could totally be eaten by a bear in fifteen mins. ;)

 

Yes! Maybe that's the real problem? There should be a police station every 5 miles so they can get to anyone's house so quickly. We live in a subdivision, but it's in the country. Our cell phone only works about every 4/10 times we try and the police are not nearby. We do have a nearby fire station so the ambulance/firetruck don't take too long, but an actual officer in the event of a crime takes a bit.

[Guest inoubliable]

Wouldn't it make more sense then that people with those problems be flagged in some way so that buying a firearm wasn't an option for them?

 

How do we flag them? Who are we flagging? Which problems get flagged? At what point?

[justamouse]

Mkay. But, then, that's my point. You can't sit through a 10 - 15 minute session with a staff member to get to know the animal and learn as much as you can about it from people who have been around it? Obviously you don't want a pet badly enough. If you wanted/needed a gun badly enough, you'd not see the value in learning about how to handle it safely? Clean it safely? Store it safely? You'd not see the value in knowing that the drunk jerkbag down the street wouldn't go through all that and so he wouldn't own a gun? That wouldn't make you feel any better?

 

 

That's not how it is here, they have to come to your house for a check, and this is a stupid analogy, people are not animals.

 

And people who own guns already DO those things. THis is exactly what I mean. People who aren't around them and just watch the news have this fictional ideal about gun ownership that is just that, fictional.

 

And the drunk jerkbag didn't need a gun with me, he just slammed my head into a 180 yo stone wall until I was passing out, and broke my jaw.

 

You're not doing so well on the analogies.

 

See, evil people will be evil with whatever they have.

[Whereneverever]

 

 

Yes! Maybe that's the real problem? There should be a police station every 5 miles so they can get to anyone's house so quickly. We live in a subdivision, but it's in the country. Our cell phone only works about every 4/10 times we try and the police are not nearby. We do have a nearby fire station so the ambulance/firetruck don't take too long, but an actual officer in the event of a crime takes a bit.

 

I think faster police response times sound wonderful, but I don't know if it's feasible everywhere. Wyoming is the tenth biggest state by area and is ranked fiftieth for population. We're spread way out. Fifteen minutes is a fast response time here.

[Guest inoubliable]

Which brings us back to something I posted at the start of this thread about the differences between to the 2 societies. Most in Canada think in terms of the greater good, how to make things better for the other people walking around. Many Americans think in terms of the personal good, if not easier/better etc for the individual it is seen as a punishment even when it is for the greater good.

 

I think that sums it up quite neatly.

[swellmomma]

Yes! Maybe that's the real problem? There should be a police station every 5 miles so they can get to anyone's house so quickly. We live in a subdivision, but it's in the country. Our cell phone only works about every 4/10 times we try and the police are not nearby. We do have a nearby fire station so the ambulance/firetruck don't take too long, but an actual officer in the event of a crime takes a bit.

 

We don't even have police in our town at all. They come in from the next town over 20 minutes down the highway. It is also a small town so when you call 911 it goes through a dispatcher in a bigger town an hour away. Then then get ahold of the officer on call, who then goes over to the cop shop in town and gets what he needs then he will come out this way. Average wait time for a cop, 30 minutes. Same with ambulance. We do have a fire hall in town so the firefighters can get to you quickly, and they end up dealing with a lot of the first aid and domestic violence issues in this town as a result.

[Guest inoubliable]

Two to three minutes? That's fast! It takes at least 15 mins here. You could totally be eaten by a bear in fifteen mins. ;)

 

I'll also note my state doesn't require a permit, class, or background check to carry a concealed handgun.

 

Okay. 15 mins. Let's say you live waaaay out in the middle of nowhere and it's snowing and it's all uphill to get there. 45 minutes. Well, gee, I'd be glad that those 45 minutes didn't include a drunk idiot with a loaded firearm.

 

I hope you're not seriously suggesting that a gun is the best defense against a bear...

[Dory]

 

 

How do we flag them? Who are we flagging? Which problems get flagged? At what point?

 

And those would be the type of questions that make more sense to be asking IMO. I am not a psychologist or a cop though.