Urban planning community | #theplannerlife

Poll results: Should Gun Regulations Be:

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Extremely More Restrictive (only cops and military)

    1 5.26%
  • Substantially More Restrictive (Permit hunting rifles and shot guns only)

    1 5.26%
  • Moderately More Restrictive (CCW type training & registration for everyone who buys any gun)

    6 31.58%
  • Slightly More Restrictive (Registration of all guns and CCW type training for handguns)

    8 42.11%
  • It is good how it is (Background checks on handguns and assault rifles)

    2 10.53%
  • Slightly Less Restrictive (Sign a form and a waiver to buy a gun)

    0 0%
  • Moderately Less Restrictive (Waiting list and CCW to get automatic guns)

    0 0%
  • Substantially Less Restrictive (Buy Automatic guns at Wal-mart, no background check)

    0 0%
  • Extremely Less Restrictive (it is my 2nd amendment right to own a bazooka)

    1 5.26%
+ Reply to thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 143

Thread: Should gun laws and regulation be increased or decreased?

  1. #101
    Quote Originally posted by btrage View post
    You lost me the second you compare food with guns. That is a ridiculous, childish argument and does nothing to further the conversation.
    But, but an AR-15 is the same as a Big Mac or a nail gun or knife or a double cappacino from Starbucks.
    When did I go from Luke Skywalker to Obi-Wan Kenobi?

  2. #102
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    12,827
    Quote Originally posted by Whose Yur Planner View post
    But, but an AR-15 is the same as a Big Mac or a nail gun or knife or a double cappacino from Starbucks.
    Because they all can kill you.

    Just like water is the same as the sky. Or the moon. Or the desktop on a windows computer. You know they are all blue.

    Irrational arguments are what make this discussion so difficult. Instead of spewing platitudes, why not instead look to rational resolutions to the problems at hand? Why not accept some accountability for the messed up situation we are in, and instead of trying to disperse the blame, accept it and try to make the situation better?
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  3. #103
    Cyburbian Linda_D's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Jamestown, New York
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally posted by Jazzman View post
    The media and people on the left make it sound as if guns turn completely ordinary Joes who are totally non-violent into mass murderers. They don't. Guns are not living, breathing things that whisper to you in the night and tell you go to kill a bunch of kids. If that's the case, given the fact that we have an estimated 200-300 million guns in this country, there should actually be a LOT more murders than what there already are.
    That's simply nonsense. This is the same old, same old NRA BS that "guns don't kill people".

    Quote Originally posted by btrage View post
    http://readersupportednews.org/opini...guns-like-cars

    Anyone who wants to own a gun should likewise take a written test on gun safety, proper means of carrying, loading and unloading, and turning the safety on and off to get a gun owner's permit, though actually shooting it must be done with a licensed gun owner. After an appropriate waiting period, gun owners should take an actual test involving everything from loading and unloading to proper storage, even shooting proficiency. And each gun should be registered in each state it travels to, each gun owner should submit to an annual inspection for their weapon, and each gun purchase should come with mandatory liability insurance. Also, the assault weapons ban should be reinstated, because nobody who isn't in the military or on the police force should ever need an AK-47 or an AR-15, not to hunt deer or protect their families.

    If people have a problem with this, then they are either criminally minded, or have an unhealthy belief that the government is going to "get them".
    An excellent op-ed piece.

    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    I totally agree with the class and the testing. But why the ban on assault weapons? What would be the definition of assault weapon? I would also question what is an "appropriate" waiting period? Time does not make one proficient in anything, practice and training does. If a person can do that in a week or a weekend, why make them wait 6 years. It is also important to note that some types of guns don't have a safety button. The safety is not loading the weapon or keeping your finger off the trigger.
    Why is it that you are so obsessed with protecting the right of civilians to own assault weapons? If you want a definition, I think that ColoGI is pretty well dead on:

    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    Assault weapons are to kill people.
    If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. -- John F. Kennedy, January 20, 1961

  4. #104
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    6,036
    Quote Originally posted by Jazzman View post
    I kind of agree with you, but then again couldn't somebody walk into a school carrying two loaded pistols with 15-round magazines apiece and just kill 30 people before they have to re-load?
    Yes, but it would not be as efficient and handguns are typically less accurate. It seems like a lot of these "active shooters" have gone in with multiple weapons, but only used one. The magazine size is more about increasing the level of difficulty for the shooter, creating opportunities for victims to act, and possibly reducing the fatality rate. They would have to pause long enough to drop the first gun and draw the second. Considering that none of these "active shooters" have been especially skilled, you're probably talking 1-3 seconds at least. That is enough time for individuals to act on their "fight or flight" instinct. Even if you are unarmed, you can cover a lot of ground to tackle a potential shooter in that scenario. Every reload is an opportunity for action and also an opportunity for the gun to jam. If there is one redeeming value to these AR-15s, it is that civilian versions are prone to jams (probably from user error & poor maintenance).

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  5. #105
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally posted by Hink View post

    Irrational arguments are what make this discussion so difficult. Instead of spewing platitudes, why not instead look to rational resolutions to the problems at hand? Why not accept some accountability for the messed up situation we are in, and instead of trying to disperse the blame, accept it and try to make the situation better?
    This is like other issues where something on the outside is used to form one's self-identity. Sports teams, guns, the constitution, anti-abortion views, save the whales...

    It is part of the human condition. We really are rational for a very small part of the day.

    Quote Originally posted by Suburb Repairman View post
    That is enough time for individuals to act on their "fight or flight" instinct. Even if you are unarmed, you can cover a lot of ground to tackle a potential shooter in that scenario. Every reload is an opportunity for action and also an opportunity for the gun to jam. If there is one redeeming value to these AR-15s, it is that civilian versions are prone to jams (probably from user error & poor maintenance).
    No, YOU can act on that. YOU can run into a hail of bullets.

    We are teaching our child to identify the children of parents who are dumb enough to teach their kids to rush the shooter. If there is any hesitation, we are teaching her the things to say to activate their inner hee-row and their inner macho-man video game character. She will ensure they intercept any bullets meant for her.

    There will be no idiotic, inane 'rush the shooter' in our household. What a dumb solution when so many other smart, rational ideas are out there. A militarized society is a sick society.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  6. #106
    Cyburbian wahday's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    New Town
    Posts
    3,968
    Quote Originally posted by Suburb Repairman View post
    Considering that none of these "active shooters" have been especially skilled, you're probably talking 1-3 seconds at least. That is enough time for individuals to act on their "fight or flight" instinct. Even if you are unarmed, you can cover a lot of ground to tackle a potential shooter in that scenario. Every reload is an opportunity for action and also an opportunity for the gun to jam. If there is one redeeming value to these AR-15s, it is that civilian versions are prone to jams (probably from user error & poor maintenance).
    Yes, but its not like shooters are standing out in a field where you can see everything they are doing. I think the way this stuff goes down, people are hiding (rightfully so), hunkered down and the shooter is trying not to be seen (as are potential victims). How can you tell if someone has paused to reload or is just looking for the next target?! Who is going to take that chance?

    Most people are not trained or otherwise planning for an event like this. How often have people's "fight or flight" responses resulted in them rushing the shooter in mass shootings so far? How many were successful? (I'm not being facetious as I really don't know). But my inclination says this not a sound idea that is likely to result in more loss of life...

    I went to a training for events like this when I was an employee of a private montessori school. The trainer was definitely not advocating this kind of action either and his strategy was apparently "industry standard" and gleaned from review of many school campus incidents (which he reviewed for us in gruesome detail). The primary objective was to keep students safe until the authorities arrived. But the training was pretty traumatic for many of the teachers - especially details about how other incidents had gone down. And although one administrator had a conceal and carry permit, none of the classroom teachers were prepared emotionally or physically to handle a gun themselves. I expect they would quit before consenting to play that role in the school (it was elementary education so we're talking lots of peace and love and safe spaces).
    The purpose of life is a life of purpose

  7. #107
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    6,036
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post

    No, YOU can act on that. YOU can run into a hail of bullets.

    We are teaching our child to identify the children of parents who are dumb enough to teach their kids to rush the shooter. If there is any hesitation, we are teaching her the things to say to activate their inner hee-row and their inner macho-man video game character. She will ensure they intercept any bullets meant for her.

    There will be no idiotic, inane 'rush the shooter' in our household. What a dumb solution when so many other smart, rational ideas are out there. A militarized society is a sick society.
    I'm talking about a lot more than school shootings--it is a mistake to restrict the concept of mass shootings to elementary schools. And YOU have to learn how to couch arguments in terms that these "Let's Roll" patriot Call-of-Duty video game heroes can follow along with (I'm in Texas--I spend a lot of time using arguments I don't necessarily agree with to get desired results). Remember, I'm making an argument IN FAVOR OF restricting magazine clip size (something I'm sure you agree with), and that argument needs to appeal to everyone. For someone like you (and honestly, like me), that 1-3 seconds to change a clip/weapon gives me time to improve the safety of my situation--finding better shelter, possible escape, etc., time for any police to make a move, time for someone to 'rush the shooter', you get the idea. Reduction of magazine size is about creating opportunities for improved safety, action and fatality reduction.

    And in case you have any misgivings about me--I mentioned having my CHL and a gun earlier. I never carry my gun in public. I'm not a hero. I'm not a gun worshiper.

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  8. #108
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally posted by Suburb Repairman View post
    I'm talking about a lot more than school shootings--it is a mistake to restrict the concept of mass shootings to elementary schools. And YOU have to learn how to couch arguments in terms that these "Let's Roll" patriot Call-of-Duty video game heroes can follow along with (I'm in Texas--I spend a lot of time using arguments I don't necessarily agree with to get desired results). Remember, I'm making an argument IN FAVOR OF restricting magazine clip size (something I'm sure you agree with), and that argument needs to appeal to everyone. For someone like you (and honestly, like me), that 1-3 seconds to change a clip/weapon gives me time to improve the safety of my situation--finding better shelter, possible escape, etc., time for any police to make a move, time for someone to 'rush the shooter', you get the idea. Reduction of magazine size is about creating opportunities for improved safety, action and fatality reduction.

    And in case you have any misgivings about me--I mentioned having my CHL and a gun earlier. I never carry my gun in public. I'm not a hero. I'm not a gun worshiper.
    I get it. The important thing in my view is the utter hopelessness of 'rush the shooter'. Someone else can commit suicide, and the clearer you can make that visual the better off we all are.

    If the best we as a society can do is 'rush the shooter', then there is going to be a mass exodus to Canada. We'll go to southern France and farm to escape a society that is bereft of ideas.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  9. #109
    Off-topic:
    Why is it that so many of the shootings happen in apparently suburban settings? The last one I can recall in an urban setting seems to have been the Bank of America shootout what 15+ years ago?
    Not for better. Not for worse. And certainly not for lunch.

  10. #110
    Super Moderator kjel's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Wishing I were in Asia somewhere!
    Posts
    10,602
    Blog entries
    5
    Quote Originally posted by Gedunker View post
    Off-topic:
    Why is it that so many of the shootings happen in apparently suburban settings? The last one I can recall in an urban setting seems to have been the Bank of America shootout what 15+ years ago?
    It would seem that the mass shootings take place more often in suburban settings, but urban areas like where I work often see a couple a day (not necessarily resulting in death though).
    "He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?" Jeremiah 22:16

  11. #111
    Quote Originally posted by kjel View post
    It would seem that the mass shootings take place more often in suburban settings, but urban areas like where I work often see a couple a day (not necessarily resulting in death though).
    I'd agree with this as well. In an urban environ, depending on where it is located, it's more like an on going thing, probably gang related. It's the suburbs where it's more of a mass shooting. People making a point, whatever that would be, I wonder what the stats for rural shootings are?
    When did I go from Luke Skywalker to Obi-Wan Kenobi?

  12. #112
    Quote Originally posted by kjel View post
    It would seem that the mass shootings take place more often in suburban settings, but urban areas like where I work often see a couple a day (not necessarily resulting in death though).
    Of course I should have included "mass" in my post. I wonder if it has to do with suburban homogeneity?
    Not for better. Not for worse. And certainly not for lunch.

  13. #113
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,596
    just found out this morning some gun nut, dressed in camo and carrying dozens of shells and a 12 guage was attempting to enter the local elementary school that many of my co-workers kids attend. Apparently he was walking up the road into the school and school officials called police who intercepted him before he actually got on campus. Apparently he said he was going to prove that only individuals with guns can protect the kids, not the police.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  14. #114
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    just found out this morning some gun nut, dressed in camo and carrying dozens of shells and a 12 guage was attempting to enter the local elementary school that many of my co-workers kids attend. Apparently he was walking up the road into the school and school officials called police who intercepted him before he actually got on campus. Apparently he said he was going to prove that only individuals with guns can protect the kids, not the police.
    Get used to it. Far from the last story like this, sadly. Little men with little brains have big dreams fantasies to be a hee-row in a movie.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  15. #115
    Quote Originally posted by Gedunker View post
    Off-topic:
    Why is it that so many of the shootings happen in apparently suburban settings? The last one I can recall in an urban setting seems to have been the Bank of America shootout what 15+ years ago?

    Everyone likes to forget this whenever there's a debate on gun control. People also like to conveniently forget that most of the gun violence in this country is drug and gang related. So why do we have 12,000 murders a year and other countries don't? Could it be because we're still fighting the "War on Drugs" and they aren't?

    That's why I hate when people draw up comparisons between us and other industrialized countries during gun control debates. It's almost always an apples-to-oranges comparison, where there are a million other variables that could just as easily explain the discrepancy in violent crime rates. Do people seriously think the only difference between the US and Japan are the gun control laws?

    The only country that might be comparable to us is Canada - it has large amounts of land that make it suitable for the shooting sports, like hunting and target shooting, so guns are not uncommon up there. That's yet another reason why guns probably aren't so big in Western Europe - not nearly enough space to hunt and have lots of shooting ranges. Because of noise and safety concerns, you generally need a lot of land in order for people to shoot recreationally. That would also explain why we have so many guns and other countries don't - we have enough land for large numbers of people to enjoy guns recreationally.

    Canada is also a multicultural nation of immigrants with a similar democratic system and common North American culture. The biggest difference is that they only have a tenth of our population. That being said, I like Canada's model for gun control. Restrictions exist without criminalizing responsible firearms owners.
    Last edited by Jazzman; 19 Jan 2013 at 8:13 AM.

  16. #116
    More thoughts: I kind of have a working theory about why Americans don't see eye to eye on gun control, but it also works for various other issues as well, and it's why I think a second civil war is not out of the question in this country.

    Although there are rural areas in the North and big cities in the South, generally speaking the North industrialized much faster than the South, which remained an agrarian society for many years after the North industrialized.

    In rural areas, gun ownership makes a lot more sense than it would to city dwellers. Guns can be used to hunt. Guns can be used for protection from people and/or wild animals - in rural areas, police protection exists of course, but it may take a long time before someone can respond to an emergency. People learn that because they are so far removed from public services, the more self-sufficient they can be, the better. This includes providing one's own personal lethal weapon that can be used if the need arises.

    In a city, especially a REALLY big and densely populated city like New York, one has to accept some level of vulnerability. In a big city, police protection (and other public services) are much more concentrated, and so to a city dweller the idea that one should carry a gun for protection because police may not respond in time to an emergency seems ridiculous. Also, people cluster together physically in close quarters all of the time in a city (buses and trains, public squares, stores, theaters, restaurants, etc) so the idea of having large numbers of people carrying lethal weapons also makes people nervous. Makes more sense to simply allow law enforcement to keep the peace with deadly weapons of their own and disarm the citizens, even if it means potentially leaving civilians vulnerable to attacks from criminals who obviously will obtain weapons no matter what.

    This kind of thinking (self-sufficiency versus trusting the government to provide services such as protection) also contributes to why people in rural areas can't fathom using taxpayer-funded public transportation to get to work, as opposed to relying on one's own personal form of transportation. Everybody should take care of their own needs, and I will take care of mine.

    Now again, I understand that the South has big cities and the North has rural areas, but this dichotomy between urban and rural ways of thinking explains a lot, in my opinion. It's why even southerners living in large cities like Atlanta still have a "rural" mentality, because the culture itself has been dominated by rural lifestyles for at least a couple of centuries. Their culture and political opinions haven't completely caught up to their new, more urbanized reality. It's why, as a person born and raised in the Deep South, I was sincerely shocked to find out that carrying a knife (not a gun, but a knife) was illegal in big cities like New York and Philadelphia. Nobody thinks twice about carrying guns and knives down south, even in the bigger cities. I have quite a few friends who carry concealed handguns (legally), and yet if I mention that to friends born and raised in New York or San Francisco, they seriously wonder what kind of people I hang out with (college-educated professionals, thank you very much).

    The cultural differences in this country are vast, and that includes (but is not limited to) opinions regarding gun control.

  17. #117
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,721
    Jazzman is on to something here. It became clear to me when discussing the issue with a grad school classmate over Facebook. Other than college in Iowa, he has always lived in urban areas. Rural people and urban people view guns in a fundamentally different way. I have had a gun since I was 12 years old. I don't need them for protection or for gathering food, although that could be the root of the culture. I view guns as a tool. To my friend they are only good for killing. It's a difference in how and where we grew up. I don't own an AR-15 but if I did, I don't care if I can only have ten round mags, that's enough for me. The large magazines are just low hanging fruit right now, you can change mags in less that a second, so limiting them does almost nothing to solve the problem. The time,money and effort needs to go to mental health reform not gun control. If we do some of the suggested background checks, and make sure these mentally ill people don't fall through the cracks it helps a lot. In these mass shooting, the signs are there we need to learn to recognize them and act.
    “As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau

  18. #118
    Quote Originally posted by giff57 View post
    Jazzman is on to something here. It became clear to me when discussing the issue with a grad school classmate over Facebook. Other than college in Iowa, he has always lived in urban areas. Rural people and urban people view guns in a fundamentally different way. I have had a gun since I was 12 years old. I don't need them for protection or for gathering food, although that could be the root of the culture. I view guns as a tool. To my friend they are only good for killing. It's a difference in how and where we grew up. I don't own an AR-15 but if I did, I don't care if I can only have ten round mags, that's enough for me. The large magazines are just low hanging fruit right now, you can change mags in less that a second, so limiting them does almost nothing to solve the problem. The time,money and effort needs to go to mental health reform not gun control. If we do some of the suggested background checks, and make sure these mentally ill people don't fall through the cracks it helps a lot. In these mass shooting, the signs are there we need to learn to recognize them and act.

    I encountered something similar among grad school peers in the Northeast. If you grow up in someplace like NYC or San Francisco, chances are you don't know a single person who legally owns a firearm. Chances are the only time you've seen a gun is when you pass by a police officer on the street, or maybe if you've been robbed. The concept of people legally and responsibly owning firearms is completely beyond comprehension for people like that because of where they grew up. Nine times out of ten, big city liberals have never even held a gun, much less shot one before. It's easy to see why they have such wild notions about any and all gun owners. They are arguing from ignorance. Not stupidity, just ignorance.

    Now if you don't like guns, that's fine. But at least know what you're talking about. I said it before, and I'll say it again - we've got people (including those in the media) who don't know the difference between a magazine and a cartridge trying to debate gun control and gun policy. Regardless of where you stand on the issue, become educated on the subject and stop negatively stereotyping all gun owners. Saying that anyone who owns a gun is evil or violent is akin to saying that everyone who lives in the Middle East is a terrorist (in both cases of course, the media tends to perpetuate the stereotypes, but I digress).

    I've said before that I definitely support increased regulations (provided they make sense and aren't just feel-good pieces of legislation). But with that being said, I really don't like hearing the liberal (or at least extreme liberal) perspective on this issue. I don't like the liberal tendency to anthropomorphize guns and treat them as if they're living, breathing things that can make decisions on their own. They're not. Guns don't fire themselves. Human beings are responsible for mass murders. If we have to pass increased restrictions on gun ownership (and I think we do), it won't be because of the guns, it will be because of the people. The people have proven themselves to be irresponsible, time and time again.

    Anywho, the difference in perspective between liberal and conservative, urban and rural, and north vs. south in this country is as vast as the Pacific Ocean. It's startling.
    Last edited by Jazzman; 19 Jan 2013 at 10:08 AM.

  19. #119
    Cyburbian ofos's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Slightly Off-Center
    Posts
    8,261
    I've been mostly staying out of this one because it quickly degraded into polemics and name calling but I'd like to thank Jazzman and giff57 for bringing some intelligent discussion back to the thread. Carry on.
    “Death comes when memories of the past exceed the vision for the future.”

  20. #120
    Quote Originally posted by ofos View post
    I've been mostly staying out of this one because it quickly degraded into polemics and name calling but I'd like to thank Jazzman and giff57 for bringing some intelligent discussion back to the thread. Carry on.
    Thanks. I've lived in one very red state and one very blue state, so I feel like I've been surrounded by extremists on both sides of this issue. I heard a friend of mine say once that no reasonable discussion on gun control can happen until all parties agree on two things:

    1. Banning guns is not the solution.
    2. Giving everybody a gun is not the solution.

  21. #121
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally posted by Jazzman View post
    Thanks. I've lived in one very red state and one very blue state, so I feel like I've been surrounded by extremists on both sides of this issue. I heard a friend of mine say once that no reasonable discussion on gun control can happen until all parties agree on two things:

    1. Banning guns is not the solution.
    2. Giving everybody a gun is not the solution.
    I'm not Mr Knows Everybody, but I know a lot of people and I've lived in a half-dozen states and overseas. I don't know anyone who thinks 1 is realistic, and I actually know several people who believe 2 is realistic.
    -------
    Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.

  22. #122
    Cyburbian DetroitPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where the weak are killed and eaten.
    Posts
    6,247
    Quote Originally posted by Gedunker View post
    Off-topic:
    Why is it that so many of the shootings happen in apparently suburban settings? The last one I can recall in an urban setting seems to have been the Bank of America shootout what 15+ years ago?
    The ones in urban or rural burgh settings rarely make the news as the assumption is that those who live in poor areas are expected to act liked that. Sad but true.

    The problem is not the guns. It is the access to mental health facilities. Too many ended up like this:
    https://www.facebook.com/NorthvilleStateHospital
    We hope for better things; it will arise from the ashes - Fr Gabriel Richard 1805

  23. #123
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    I'm not Mr Knows Everybody, but I know a lot of people and I've lived in a half-dozen states and overseas. I don't know anyone who thinks 1 is realistic, and I actually know several people who believe 2 is realistic.

    I suppose we've just had different experiences. I've met quite a few people who want to ban ALL guns, period.

    Again, both solutions are obviously ridiculous.

  24. #124
    Quote Originally posted by DetroitPlanner View post
    The ones in urban or rural burgh settings rarely make the news as the assumption is that those who live in poor areas are expected to act liked that. Sad but true.

    The problem is not the guns. It is the access to mental health facilities. Too many ended up like this:
    https://www.facebook.com/NorthvilleStateHospital
    Yeah, pointing the finger at the mentally ill/mental health facilities is the popular thing to do right now. However, I think few people are willing to really look at the issue of mental health and it's implications. If we are looking for an easy, feel good solution, it's not there.
    When did I go from Luke Skywalker to Obi-Wan Kenobi?

  25. #125
    *edit*

+ Reply to thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 36
    Last post: 13 Sep 2013, 9:41 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last post: 22 Mar 2013, 11:30 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last post: 06 Jan 2007, 9:03 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last post: 11 Feb 2005, 11:39 AM