Mr. President, you brought it up.

[Glass*Soul]

How many guns do we need in citizen's hands to prevent mass shootings? If more guns will really work, we need to figure out the necessary amount and distribute guns and ammo until a safe saturation point is reached. Yes? No?

 

[HannahT]

Here's my thought: People who refuse to consider reasonable gun law regulations are partially responsible for gun deaths. I think the right to operate deadly weapons such as guns should be as difficult to obtain as the right to drive cars.

What do people consider 'reasonable' seems to be the issue. How do you address the mentally ill, and the gangs that kill people?

 

[HannahT]

How many guns do we need in citizen's hands to prevent mass shootings? If more guns will really work, we need to figure out the necessary amount and distribute guns and ammo until a safe saturation point is reached. Yes? No?

The amount of guns to me doesn't help, nor does the other side stating to remove all guns help either.

 

[OGM]

We also need training, and the nerve to actually defend ourselves if necessary.

Do you think training and arming the U.S. population would reduce homicide rates?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

What do people consider 'reasonable' seems to be the issue. How do you address the mentally ill, and the gangs that kill people?

If people had to pass a proficiency test in order to qualify to own and operate a gun that would go a long way towards eliminating the problem.

Many of the mass shooters at schools etc newly acquire their guns in order to do the deed. Therefore a newly enacted law would begin to benefit the nation from day one.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

If people had to pass a proficiency test in order to qualify to own and operate a gun that would go a long way towards eliminating the problem.

Many of the mass shooters at schools etc newly acquire their guns in order to do the deed. Therefore a newly enacted law would begin to benefit the nation from day one.

Are you saying that we should make sure all future “mass murders” are now also proficient with their future firearms before they purchase their weapons?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Are you saying that we should make sure all future “mass murders” are now also proficient with their future firearms before they purchase their weapons?

Do you think that's a fair interpretation of what I said?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

If people have to pass a proficiency test to purchase firearms? Most of these shooters have no criminal record until they decide to act out their attack and are able to legally buy guns. Ensuring they are proficient means more dead victims.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Do you think training and arming the U.S. population would reduce homicide rates?

Maybe not, but perhaps "the right people will get shot" (quoting Dirty Harry).

 

[AceHero]

Obama doesn't realize that when he speaks after such a tragedy and turns it into a "political" moment, he defeats whatever he is attempting to accomplish.

Ad Nauseam.

Are you saying that after a shooting you simply refuse to consider reasonable gun control laws for a while?

Yeah, how about we just try them out for a bit? If it results in chaos and destruction we can always go back to living in the wild wild west.

Yeah, because having oodles of guns makes one more protected than whatever is in one's current collection. Good grief. Talk about overreacting.

My collection is pretty slim.

That's what I mean. If you're armed, you're armed.

How many guns do we need in citizen's hands to prevent mass shootings? If more guns will really work, we need to figure out the necessary amount and distribute guns and ammo until a safe saturation point is reached. Yes? No?

The amount of guns to me doesn't help, nor does the other side stating to remove all guns help either.

Since when has the other side said it wants to get rid of guns altogether?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That's what I mean. If you're armed, you're armed.

I'm only 'armed' when I'm hunting (one of the safest recreational activities we have).

 

[brinny]

Yeah, how about we just try them out for a bit? If it results in chaos and destruction we can always go back to living in the wild wild west.



That's what I mean. If you're armed, you're armed.



Since when has the other side said it wants to get rid of guns altogether?

We obviously disagree. I don't wanna be at an armed criminal's "mercy" and that's all i got with no way of defending myself.

Ever seen the movie "Love's Long Journey"?

 

[Vylo]

More guns will equal more mass shootings, not less. No guns would mean virtually no mass shootings, but comes at a cost.