The right to bear arms. It's in the American Constitution. And taken out of context nowadays but why let a small thing like that get in the way of things.
Don't forget this is a country where Charlton Heston protested against the Bodycount (Ice-T) song "cop killer" whilst being a member of the NRA and complaining about the banning of the only gun that can pierce a cop's body armour.
I have family in Phillie and my brother in law has a gun in the house , he also has a three year old daughter. Now I can see why he has it , it's in case they get broken into and the burglar has a gun (which is unlikely in this country so no real need). However I'm still very uncomfortable with it.
Once again I feel like a lot of the issues in America come down to an outdated system where so much influence is held by gun owners , don't go upsetting them too much or you won't get the vote. Is Trump a pro gun guy because he just is or because he knows the amount of power the NRA hold?
As much as I don't like Hilary Clinton her anti gun stance was something to be admired but I get the feeling if voted in she would've come up against the same brick wall a many others have.
The problem seems to be not so much people owning guns but more the type and amount they are allowed and the lack of checks on people's backgrounds in most states.
One of my ex-coworker's 13 year old niece was at the concert and strangers covered her during the shooting and drover her away to safety. An acquaintance of mine on Facebook, their son in law was killed. Small world.
What we know....
He was 64 and is the second oldest mass shooter in US history, No history of violence, although his father was a piece of work Multi-millionaire. Gambles a lot. Never even had a speeding or parking ticket. Never owned a gun until 2 years ago No extreme political views Baked cookies for his mom Once lived at Mandalay Bay for 4 months. Apparently was well-known there. Not religious.
More....
16 guns found in the room 18 more found at his home possible explosives found
Check this out... Someone recorded 25 min of a police scanner during the shooting. It is riveting and I get two things from it. First, that in situations like this, a lot of correct info gets lost in the shuffle and confusion reigns. And two, that the police on the ground inside the shooting zone during the shooting are heroes. They are dealing with victims as it happens while also calling in info to their dispatcher.
29sec: a policeman on the ground correctly identifies the shooting position right away but is not listened to. You can hear the shots as the guy speaks. 3-4 min: most police are unsure where it is coming from. 6 min: a police officer is already on the 31st floor right under the shooter. You can hear the gunfire in the background. Police on the ground at the event are calling in injuries. 7min: more automatic shots heard in background 8:30: more shots can be heard 9 min: "We can't worry about the victims, we need to stop the shooter before we have more victims!" 9:30: dispatcher asks who was shot, and I think she is not really understanding just how many people are hit. It might just be hard to process. 10min: shut down elevator to Mandalay. 11min: they are on their way to the 32nd floor. 12min: police report shots have stopped. No shots can be heard after this point. Report of officer shot. Shutting down Tropicana Blvd. 15min: false report of three shooters 16min: the room is correctly identified, room 135 and a "4-man unit" on the floor. 19min: says a security guard in the hallways on 32nd floor is shot 20min: "lock your police cars, citizens are trying to grab shotguns." 24min: report of officer shot We can assume from the fact that the shots stopped after 12 min and they did not enter for some time later, he killed himself rather early on. And that he did shoot for at least ten minutes, as eyewitnesses stated.
He had 19 guns including two on tripods and long range scopes and had hired two rooms so that he could increase his range of fire.
Not to mention police found ammonium nitrate in his car and binary explosive tannerite at his home.
Now saying 23 in the hotel room 19 back at his home. Because you need that many to protect your home if burgled.
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
He had 19 guns including two on tripods and long range scopes and had hired two rooms so that he could increase his range of fire.
Not to mention police found ammonium nitrate in his car and binary explosive tannerite at his home.
Now saying 23 in the hotel room 19 back at his home. Because you need that many to protect your home if burgled.
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
I can't see them ever banning guns completely, but at the very least they should at least change the law to impose a limit on how many you can buy.
In Nevada, people aren’t even required to get a licence or register their weapons, and there’s no limit to the number of guns a person can buy at one time.
Surely they should at least introduce a law where you need a license and all guns need to be registered and impose a limit of (for example) 2-3 per person. If someone's acquiring 20/30/40+ guns then there's a major problem.
Listening to interviews on the radio I get the sense that many Americans are secretly quite proud that this sort of thing can happen in their country. It reinforces the fact that America is the only country that values freedom above life itself.
Not much point in arguing with them about this one!
Do the state gun laws apply to where you buy the gun or where you reside? ie if you live in a state with more ‘stringent’ gun laws, can you just go to Nevada to take advantage of the less stringent laws?
Regardless of the overall ease of accessibility of guns...surely at least a country wide law should apply to something this serious?
He had 19 guns including two on tripods and long range scopes and had hired two rooms so that he could increase his range of fire.
Not to mention police found ammonium nitrate in his car and binary explosive tannerite at his home.
Now saying 23 in the hotel room 19 back at his home. Because you need that many to protect your home if burgled.
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
I can't see them even banning guns completely, but at the very least they should at least change the law to impose a limit on how many you can buy.
In Nevada, people aren’t even required to get a licence or register their weapons, and there’s no limit to the number of guns a person can buy at one time.
Surely they should at least introduce a law where you need a license and all guns need to be registered and impose a limit of (for example) 2-3 per person. If someone's acquiring 20/30/40+ guns then there's a major problem.
It will never happen unfortunately. Too many conservatives have been told for too long that gun ownership is a part of the culture wars, and that liberals want to take them away. Republicans have spent decades appointing "pro-gun" judges to courts, and when groups like the NRA challenge gun restrictions said courts often strike down attempts to seriously control guns in this country.
One of the first things Trump did in office was to reverse an executive order by Obama to stop the sale of guns to the mentally ill. So...yeah.
He had 19 guns including two on tripods and long range scopes and had hired two rooms so that he could increase his range of fire.
Not to mention police found ammonium nitrate in his car and binary explosive tannerite at his home.
Now saying 23 in the hotel room 19 back at his home. Because you need that many to protect your home if burgled.
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
I can't see them even banning guns completely, but at the very least they should at least change the law to impose a limit on how many you can buy.
In Nevada, people aren’t even required to get a licence or register their weapons, and there’s no limit to the number of guns a person can buy at one time.
Surely they should at least introduce a law where you need a license and all guns need to be registered and impose a limit of (for example) 2-3 per person. If someone's acquiring 20/30/40+ guns then there's a major problem.
It will never happen unfortunately. Too many conservatives have been told for too long that gun ownership is a part of the culture wars, and that liberals want to take them away. Republicans have spent decades appointing "pro-gun" judges to courts, and when groups like the NRA challenge gun restrictions said courts often strike down attempts to seriously control guns in this country.
One of the first things Trump did in office was to reverse an executive order by Obama to stop the sale of guns to the mentally ill. So...yeah.
He had 19 guns including two on tripods and long range scopes and had hired two rooms so that he could increase his range of fire.
Not to mention police found ammonium nitrate in his car and binary explosive tannerite at his home.
Now saying 23 in the hotel room 19 back at his home. Because you need that many to protect your home if burgled.
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
I can't see them even banning guns completely, but at the very least they should at least change the law to impose a limit on how many you can buy.
In Nevada, people aren’t even required to get a licence or register their weapons, and there’s no limit to the number of guns a person can buy at one time.
Surely they should at least introduce a law where you need a license and all guns need to be registered and impose a limit of (for example) 2-3 per person. If someone's acquiring 20/30/40+ guns then there's a major problem.
I'm sure we could all come up with dozens of ways in which lives could be saved through changes to gun control. Obama tried on several occasions after all but he was blocked by Congress.
It's a totally, disgusting, utterly pointless waste of lives but sadly there is no appetite to address the problem properly, or even try to, in a huge amount of the population. Until that changes politicians will still be beholden to the gun lobby and things will just carry on getting worse and worse and worse...
It is literally a waste of time and energy even debating it tbh.
He had 19 guns including two on tripods and long range scopes and had hired two rooms so that he could increase his range of fire.
Not to mention police found ammonium nitrate in his car and binary explosive tannerite at his home.
Now saying 23 in the hotel room 19 back at his home. Because you need that many to protect your home if burgled.
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
I can't see them even banning guns completely, but at the very least they should at least change the law to impose a limit on how many you can buy.
In Nevada, people aren’t even required to get a licence or register their weapons, and there’s no limit to the number of guns a person can buy at one time.
Surely they should at least introduce a law where you need a license and all guns need to be registered and impose a limit of (for example) 2-3 per person. If someone's acquiring 20/30/40+ guns then there's a major problem.
I'm sure we could all come up with dozens of ways in which lives could be saved through changes to gun control. Obama tried on several occasions after all but he was blocked by Congress.
It's a totally, disgusting, utterly pointless waste of lives but sadly there is no appetite to address the problem properly, or even try to, in a huge amount of the population. Until that changes politicians will still be beholden to the gun lobby and things will just carry on getting worse and worse and worse...
It is literally a waste of time and energy even debating it tbh.
Sadly that's very true. The 4 worst mass shootings in US history have all occurred in the last 10 years.
And the whole good guy/bad guy analogy is deeply flawed. Whilst the debate is kept at the immature level, something the NRA strives to do, then it will never be resolved. To a certain extent there is not such thing as a good guy. Anybody (as the US police constantly show) can become a "bad guy", often without warning. The gun is the perfect storm of too much power and too much simplicity. Anybody can fire a gun and kill from a nice safe distance. A momentary flare of anger, that would pass in an unarmed person, can too easily become another needless death.
Every drunken fight outside a pub, that in this country often ends in nothing more than a few bruises, is a potential deadly encounter in the US. The only surprise about those figures above is it's not more, as the power of life and death is handed out without any due thought to if the person is ready for that responsibility, and with no training on how to use that weapon and how to react to others using them.
That is the worst part about the NRA, the may preach the constitution and rights, but they won't even back basic training before being allowed to own a deadly weapon.
From the perspective of the average "out of town" American, who have grown up with guns, its not flawed. Its how they see it whether facts back it up or not
Just imagine the carnage on a Saturday night in the UK if everyone was armed.....
There are people who have permitted shotguns / rifles / handguns around London and the Home Counties. But thats not my point.
I think you’ll find that all handguns are banned. Members of shooting clubs can buy rifles but you cannot have a licence for a handgun unless it’s been modified to be too long to conceal it.
Obviously this rule doesn’t apply to the Police and the millatry but the public can’t buy a concealable hand gun.
You can have one added to your fac if you "have good reason" eg. equine vets, gamekeepers, deer stalkers can all apply. Some stalkers also volunteer to attend RTAs involving wildlife and so are allowed to have them. Although I think in the UK, they have to be limited to take only 2 rounds at a time.
Just seen an American professor on BBC TV (based here in The UK), who gave the figure of 1,500,000 people as having died in gun related incidents in The US since 1968! Wow, that's incredible......from that figure one may also ask how many have been injured.......countless more no doubt and many of them will have had life changing injuries.
For anything to change in America it will have to happen in steps. It is interesting how gun control is an area where there is the clearest evidence possible to show that countries that restrict guns have significantly less deaths by guns and that is an understatement! But if you have been brought up loving guns and believing having them is a human right, you can blind yourself to the simple facts. People are generally good at that.
So maybe the focus has to be to unite people who have a pro guns agenda, but can at least see the logic of not having semi- automatic weapons, that people have seen can easily be converted into something very much like a fully automatic weapon, available to anybody. Maybe when deaths by semi automatic weapons show a massive reduction, the next stage of the argument should be had there from a more secure platform.
Polarising it now into guns or no guns is only going to entrench positions. The issue in America is, if a President brought in gun laws like we have in Europe, the next one would reverse them. There would be many hidden guns in the system and the gun lobby would be able to find a few aremed robberies or burglaries where victims couldn't protect themselves with guns and the clamour to have them back would be massive.
America has to get there, but the battle has to be won in small steps. The focus needs to be on teh semi automatic weapons and a consensus has to be found.
If mass shootings are seen as a problem by lawmakers then there will be more regulation but we have to conclude that it's not really an issue for them.
If a right to bear arms in a constitution written in 1791 that obviously belongs to a different age and set of circumstances is beyond debate it suggests unnecessary loss of life doesn't really matter.
The gun lobby in the US are beyond rational debate.....
on the news last night, even if they done background checks this guys would of came back as sound, as others have said the issue with guns is theres so many in america that theres always going to be a way to buy them, as i understand it if i attend a gun show in certain states in which they allow unlicensed gun traders, they take my details ask me have i been in trouble with the law i say no and off i go with a pistol and as much ammo as i can carry, see video below.
on the news last night, even if they done background checks this guys would of came back as sound, as others have said the issue with guns is theres so many in america that theres always going to be a way to buy them, as i understand it if i attend a gun show in certain states in which they allow unlicensed gun traders, they take my details ask me have i been in trouble with the law i say no and off i go with a pistol and as much ammo as i can carry, see video below.
I don't actually think that a lot of Americans have an issue with guns hence the problem. Gun culture is so deeply ingrained that it's impossible to understand as an outsider.
on the news last night, even if they done background checks this guys would of came back as sound, as others have said the issue with guns is theres so many in america that theres always going to be a way to buy them, as i understand it if i attend a gun show in certain states in which they allow unlicensed gun traders, they take my details ask me have i been in trouble with the law i say no and off i go with a pistol and as much ammo as i can carry, see video below.
I don't actually think that a lot of Americans have an issue with guns hence the problem. Gun culture is so deeply ingrained that it's impossible to understand as an outsider.
Totally agree with the above
Though I don't understand how anyone can see why the "gun nuts" have to own black military / assault type weapons.
on the news last night, even if they done background checks this guys would of came back as sound, as others have said the issue with guns is theres so many in america that theres always going to be a way to buy them, as i understand it if i attend a gun show in certain states in which they allow unlicensed gun traders, they take my details ask me have i been in trouble with the law i say no and off i go with a pistol and as much ammo as i can carry, see video below.
I don't actually think that a lot of Americans have an issue with guns hence the problem. Gun culture is so deeply ingrained that it's impossible to understand as an outsider.
Totally agree with the above
Though I don't understand how anyone can see why the "gun nuts" have to own black military / assault type weapons.
Is it the same syndrome as those men that have the biggest 4x4 trucks with the jacked up big wheels. The biggest to show they are macho men. Think its called small member syndrome...
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
Maybe what they need is a spate of assault rifles mowing down members of Congress and Judges. Maybe then it will hit home that the people that are being killed are more important than their political careers.
Maybe, even, the school that the children of members of Congress go to needs to be targeted?
Just to be clear I'm not, for one second, suggesting that I want someone to do this but it's really easy for those that are confident that it won't happen to them to fail to address the problem.
Sadly, however, even though it is more dramatic to see people killed it's the same selfishness that sees those in The Houses of Parliament 'protect' large institutions that sponsor their careers.
They will never do anything about it and, with technology advancing in the firearms industry, these incidents will have an ever increasing body count.
I fear that the worst thing that might come out of this is that it might provide a blueprint for terrorists. One man, acting alone, managed to kill 58 people. I know he had many guns but I suspect that, in reality, it would only have taken one. I don't play COD and that kind of game but I have played the one with the ducks at fairgrounds and these poor people were sitting ducks. If you don't care who you kill you just have to fire loads of rounds into the crowd.
Maybe what they need is a spate of assault rifles mowing down members of Congress and Judges. Maybe then it will hit home that the people that are being killed are more important than their political careers.
Maybe, even, the school that the children of members of Congress go to needs to be targeted?
Just to be clear I'm not, for one second, suggesting that I want someone to do this but it's really easy for those that are confident that it won't happen to them to fail to address the problem.
Sadly, however, even though it is more dramatic to see people killed it's the same selfishness that sees those in The Houses of Parliament 'protect' large institutions that sponsor their careers.
They will never do anything about it and, with technology advancing in the firearms industry, these incidents will have an ever increasing body count.
I fear that the worst thing that might come out of this is that it might provide a blueprint for terrorists. One man, acting alone, managed to kill 58 people. I know he had many guns but I suspect that, in reality, it would only have taken one. I don't play COD and that kind of game but I have played the one with the ducks at fairgrounds and these poor people were sitting ducks. If you don't care who you kill you just have to fire loads of rounds into the crowd.
Completely agree with this... Not being harsh either in the sense that I want to see someone killed but think the only way we'll see an end to this sort of thing (and the countless terrorist attacks we've seen of late) is if a really big celebrity or politician gets killed themselves as it seems the only thing that'll make them sit up and pay attention.
Saying that though just look at the attack on Westminster Bridge that happened right next to Parliament - It was the first time an attack had happened really close a Government building and the first action was to add better protection to the politicians rather than the masses
If the gunman could legally buy a semi-automatic weapon that could easily be adapted to enable it to work as an automatic firing 400 to 800 rounds a minute then you are essentially f***ed.
The gun lobby seem to be in favour of as little regulation as possible and they see it as a right to own whatever gun you desire. Gun owners should use guns responsibly and be trusted to do so as far as they are concerned and this is an essential freedom. Guns are safe in their eyes if used responsibly and the odd homicide is a price worth paying to defend this essential right.
Let's not pretend it is only about their outdated Constitution. It's about the money that the gun manufacturers make. This happens both in the military and the domestic market.
It's about money over the lives of those that are not connected to you. I can almost accept it from those running the companies but the elected politicians are there, specifically, to serve and protect the public.
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
I would say that is a justified homicide .. if she had not had a gun she could (or probably would have) been raped and/or murdered
This is an incident whereby gun ownership was a life saver. American cities are still crime ridden and many criminals are armed with guns or knives and have no respect for human life. Law abiding citizens have a right and many may feel the need to own a gun and to know how to use it. There is little or no justification though for anyone owning a rapid fire machine gun or the like
I have friends and relations in the states, some own guns, some don't .. a lot has to do with the area where they live and their own state of mind. To the gun owners it's just like owning a necessary tool
couple of freinds have shotgun licences here, both of which there guns are stored at home in approved cabinets and are used for sports shooting ( clays ) as far as im aware as opposed to live targets.
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
Bit different having one gun under the pillow for protection, than 45 automatic weapons stashed in your spare room
Comments
I have family in Phillie and my brother in law has a gun in the house , he also has a three year old daughter. Now I can see why he has it , it's in case they get broken into and the burglar has a gun (which is unlikely in this country so no real need). However I'm still very uncomfortable with it.
Once again I feel like a lot of the issues in America come down to an outdated system where so much influence is held by gun owners , don't go upsetting them too much or you won't get the vote. Is Trump a pro gun guy because he just is or because he knows the amount of power the NRA hold?
As much as I don't like Hilary Clinton her anti gun stance was something to be admired but I get the feeling if voted in she would've come up against the same brick wall a many others have.
The problem seems to be not so much people owning guns but more the type and amount they are allowed and the lack of checks on people's backgrounds in most states.
What we know....
He was 64 and is the second oldest mass shooter in US history,
No history of violence, although his father was a piece of work
Multi-millionaire. Gambles a lot.
Never even had a speeding or parking ticket.
Never owned a gun until 2 years ago
No extreme political views
Baked cookies for his mom
Once lived at Mandalay Bay for 4 months. Apparently was well-known there.
Not religious.
More....
16 guns found in the room
18 more found at his home
possible explosives found
Check this out... Someone recorded 25 min of a police scanner during the shooting. It is riveting and I get two things from it.
First, that in situations like this, a lot of correct info gets lost in the shuffle and confusion reigns. And two, that the police on the ground inside the shooting zone during the shooting are heroes. They are dealing with victims as it happens while also calling in info to their dispatcher.
29sec: a policeman on the ground correctly identifies the shooting position right away but is not listened to. You can hear the shots as the guy speaks.
3-4 min: most police are unsure where it is coming from.
6 min: a police officer is already on the 31st floor right under the shooter. You can hear the gunfire in the background. Police on the ground at the event are calling in injuries.
7min: more automatic shots heard in background
8:30: more shots can be heard
9 min: "We can't worry about the victims, we need to stop the shooter before we have more victims!"
9:30: dispatcher asks who was shot, and I think she is not really understanding just how many people are hit. It might just be hard to process.
10min: shut down elevator to Mandalay.
11min: they are on their way to the 32nd floor.
12min: police report shots have stopped. No shots can be heard after this point. Report of officer shot. Shutting down Tropicana Blvd.
15min: false report of three shooters
16min: the room is correctly identified, room 135 and a "4-man unit" on the floor.
19min: says a security guard in the hallways on 32nd floor is shot
20min: "lock your police cars, citizens are trying to grab shotguns."
24min: report of officer shot
We can assume from the fact that the shots stopped after 12 min and they did not enter for some time later, he killed himself rather early on. And that he did shoot for at least ten minutes, as eyewitnesses stated.
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=378_1506956902
Thats 42 opportunities missed to stop this happening in my view. I'm no longer even shocked by these events any more but I'll never understand how so many Americans cannot see the ludicrousness of allowing this situation to continue.
In Nevada, people aren’t even required to get a licence or register their weapons, and there’s no limit to the number of guns a person can buy at one time.
Surely they should at least introduce a law where you need a license and all guns need to be registered and impose a limit of (for example) 2-3 per person. If someone's acquiring 20/30/40+ guns then there's a major problem.
Not much point in arguing with them about this one!
Regardless of the overall ease of accessibility of guns...surely at least a country wide law should apply to something this serious?
One of the first things Trump did in office was to reverse an executive order by Obama to stop the sale of guns to the mentally ill. So...yeah.
It's a totally, disgusting, utterly pointless waste of lives but sadly there is no appetite to address the problem properly, or even try to, in a huge amount of the population. Until that changes politicians will still be beholden to the gun lobby and things will just carry on getting worse and worse and worse...
It is literally a waste of time and energy even debating it tbh.
Wow, that's incredible......from that figure one may also ask how many have been injured.......countless more no doubt and many of them will have had life changing injuries.
So maybe the focus has to be to unite people who have a pro guns agenda, but can at least see the logic of not having semi- automatic weapons, that people have seen can easily be converted into something very much like a fully automatic weapon, available to anybody. Maybe when deaths by semi automatic weapons show a massive reduction, the next stage of the argument should be had there from a more secure platform.
Polarising it now into guns or no guns is only going to entrench positions. The issue in America is, if a President brought in gun laws like we have in Europe, the next one would reverse them. There would be many hidden guns in the system and the gun lobby would be able to find a few aremed robberies or burglaries where victims couldn't protect themselves with guns and the clamour to have them back would be massive.
America has to get there, but the battle has to be won in small steps. The focus needs to be on teh semi automatic weapons and a consensus has to be found.
If a right to bear arms in a constitution written in 1791 that obviously belongs to a different age and set of circumstances is beyond debate it suggests unnecessary loss of life doesn't really matter.
The gun lobby in the US are beyond rational debate.....
Though I don't understand how anyone can see why the "gun nuts" have to own black military / assault type weapons.
Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead!
No further action taken.
Maybe, even, the school that the children of members of Congress go to needs to be targeted?
Just to be clear I'm not, for one second, suggesting that I want someone to do this but it's really easy for those that are confident that it won't happen to them to fail to address the problem.
Sadly, however, even though it is more dramatic to see people killed it's the same selfishness that sees those in The Houses of Parliament 'protect' large institutions that sponsor their careers.
They will never do anything about it and, with technology advancing in the firearms industry, these incidents will have an ever increasing body count.
I fear that the worst thing that might come out of this is that it might provide a blueprint for terrorists. One man, acting alone, managed to kill 58 people. I know he had many guns but I suspect that, in reality, it would only have taken one. I don't play COD and that kind of game but I have played the one with the ducks at fairgrounds and these poor people were sitting ducks. If you don't care who you kill you just have to fire loads of rounds into the crowd.
Saying that though just look at the attack on Westminster Bridge that happened right next to Parliament - It was the first time an attack had happened really close a Government building and the first action was to add better protection to the politicians rather than the masses
The gun lobby seem to be in favour of as little regulation as possible and they see it as a right to own whatever gun you desire. Gun owners should use guns responsibly and be trusted to do so as far as they are concerned and this is an essential freedom. Guns are safe in their eyes if used responsibly and the odd homicide is a price worth paying to defend this essential right.
It's about money over the lives of those that are not connected to you. I can almost accept it from those running the companies but the elected politicians are there, specifically, to serve and protect the public.
This is an incident whereby gun ownership was a life saver. American cities are still crime ridden and many criminals are armed with guns or knives and have no respect for human life. Law abiding citizens have a right and many may feel the need to own a gun and to know how to use it.
There is little or no justification though for anyone owning a rapid fire machine gun or the like
I have friends and relations in the states, some own guns, some don't .. a lot has to do with the area where they live and their own state of mind. To the gun owners it's just like owning a necessary tool