Do what?

You need to go back and read a little Roman history, PC.... And violent crime has been going down for years. This was the act of a disturbed mind controlling a deadly weapon.

Here's something that might interest you .... http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

Jan,
That's one of the more stupid pieces of results-oriented garbage that passes for social science today, but at least it notes in passing that "it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot." You think? Another problem with the study is it relied on the random control people it contacted to tell a stranger if they were carrying a gun (perhaps illegally) at a certain time. A look at people with licenses to carry -- who have a consistent prior record as law-abiding citizens -- will show quite the opposite: they have very low rates of committing or falling victim to violent crime.

Blame anything but the guns. I hope you sleep well tonight. I know I wont.

Your description of your family sounds nothing like mine PC.
You should figure out why your family is " only a shadow of what families used to be"

So we can dull ourselves to what has happened? Dull ourselves again, so we don't take action? Are there any anti-gun groups in New Hampshire that need a volunteer? This has got to stop

I think those who are crying(or will cry), "protect my gun rights" should go kiss your weapons tonight. Kiss them for the parents who can't kiss their babies tonight, for your rights have out weighed their young little lives... again.

When a train derails or a plane crashes, we don't wait 24 hours to talk about the cause or prevention.
It has been over 13 years since Columbine. Is it still "knee-jerk" to discuss what happened there, and to draw a clear, direct line through to today?
If we don't start the conversation NOW, today, we are doing a disservice to today's victims. More importantly we are setting up the victims of the next tragedy.

The beauty of that sort of thinking (which we hear often after each of these tragedies) is that in just a few days, there'll be another such tragedy and it will once again be "too soon to talk anout it". So it's never timely to talk about it.

In fact, just this morning, there's news of another mall shooting in California. So I guess we need to reset the "too soon to talk about it" clock again, ehh?

So you want to arm the teachers? More guns? That's just stupid.
In this case, far as I can tell, it took a few minutes for this guy with his assault weapons to kill 20 kids and 6 adults. You think armed teachers will make a difference? Then I have a question for you - Myles Webster stood a couple of feet from a Manchester Cop and shot him 5 times. The officer, presumably trained, had his gun drawn. Myles Webster did not get shot.
You think a kindergarten teacher would do better?
I think too many people daydream about what kind of heroes they would be, if only they had more guns.
Tell you what - if we start now, someday there will be far fewer assault weapons, and maybe, just maybe, we can change our culture so that we no longer consider "more guns" to be the answer.
Here in NH, if you have the cash and a couple of hours you can get just about any gun you want and the ammo for it too. No background checks needed. At all.
The NRA and our own dear free-staters want it all their way - no restrictions of any kind on any weapon, no restrictions on who can carry it or where. They almost got their wish in the last session, except for Gov. Lynch's veto.
Time to stop.
Enough is enough.
Honor the kids who paid with their lives - we can change this, and we owe it to them to do so.

If he did not have a trigger to pull, especially one attached to a gun that can fire 10's of bullets per minute, there would not have been fatalities.
It's the guns.
You ask WHY?
Because he had guns. Doesn't matter where or how he got them, he got them, and we all share responsibility.
It's very simple - it's the guns.

We could have helped him by telling him to pull the triger first on himself. Oh come on the poor Adam he lived in a 1.3 million dollar home, why people go hungry. Played video games for hours, did not work. Mom should have kicked his but out long ago, and maybe he would have had a idea of what live really is instead of just sitting around feeling bad for himself because mom was planning on admitting him to a psyc hosp. He had food, a roof over his head, and people who seemed to care for him even though he seemed like a total piece of crap... He knew what he was doing, or he would not have killed him self or had the ear plugs. I hope he is in hell now listening to all of the kids he killed over and over..

The problem is the gun + the person. Neither one kills without the other.
In China, nobody died.

China! Are you kidding me? We are looking at China for our emulation? We closed all the health care facilities and left these people "out there." China, I still can't believe we are looking at China! Good luck

Patriot - read Marks (and others, all over the place) comment. A guy in China with a knife went nuts in a school and attacked a bunch of kids, just like in Ct.
Difference is, Guy with Knife killed 0 people. Guy with Gun killed 28.
And Mark, you can run away from a knife.
Just because we can't stop all forms of killing doesn't mean we should not try to stop any.

Steve - Here's a list of all the school knife attacks in China in just the past couple of years. Lots of dead children but no guns. Don't fixate on the tool used (gun/knife/bomb/hammer/fists), we should be looking at why these sick individuals are not being helped/medicated or in a secure facility if they are diagnosed as dangerous and refuse medication/treatment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010%E2%80%932011)

Mark... if that man yesterday had walked into that school with a knife, I guarantee you 20 children would not be dead. Because of his weapon, the casualties were high.

Steve from NH (i think), how many can you kill with a plane? Mental health is the leading cause of death!

Nikki - according to the latest (horrible) reports of what happened all 20 children were in two classrooms, he had them cornered and basically was able to execute every one of them (which is why there are only dead children, none wounded), if he had a knife he wouldn't be giving them shallow cuts he would have calmly slit their throats, that is what psychopaths are capable of :(

Please don't fixate on the tool he used, we need more focus on the criminals committing these horrendous crimes, their mental illnesses, and the society that is making them more common, we must do this or it will just keep happening.

Mark... he had to shoot his way into the school to get into it... as it had security and he had to be buzzed in. If he had a knife, he'd still be at the door scratching the glass.

Not to mention, other adults would have had time to take him down... the six he killed could have done something, they were brave enough to try to protect him when he had a gun, think of what they could have done if he only had a knife. I don't see how people can selfishly think of me me me and my gun rights, when twenty children are dead. It's selfishness, plain and simple.

Nikki - again you are fixating on the gun not the criminal. Look past your hatred of guns and try to see the larger picture where mentally ill people will use any tool available. Treat the illness and stop the criminals.

1) The police said he forced his way into the school not that he shot his way in, he could have barged past someone legitimately entering the school, thrown a rock through a window, even driven a car through through a window to get in.

2) I assume you have never fought anyone armed with a knife. I have. Even people with years of martial arts / hand-to-hand training usually get cut badly trying to disarm someone with a knife. Against trained police officers tests (the Tueller drill devised by a Utah police sgt) have shown a man with a gun 21 feet away can get to and strike an officer before the officer can draw and fire his gun. That is why the police treat a knife as a deadly weapon and respond with lethal force instead of trying to disarm.

Its laughable, your argument that he would have done the same damage if he had a knife. Its the argument spoon fed to you, come up with one of your own. Also laughable is your thought of my hatred of guns. I grew up with guns in my household, my father is a RESPONSIBLE gun owner. I saw them only a handful of times and NEVER knew where they were kept, as they were locked down. We force people every day to be responsible, in other states, people are forced to wear a seat belt, we are forced to not consume alcohol before getting behind the wheel of a car, I don't see why forcing people to be responsible with machines that kill is such a big deal. Why are your rights more important than the rights of the people killed daily in this country by guns. It's selfish to cry foul when all those children are dead because the rights of the irresponsible gun owner comes first.

Actualy Steve the freak did not kill with an assult weapon. That was left in his vehicle. He killed with 2 handguns. Handguns that the law already saya a 20 yr old cannot purchase. And for the record an AR -15 (American assult rifle ) was not designed to kill but to wound . There is a reason for that.

Look at the freak in AZ that tried to take out the congresswoman. A vehicle would have been just as deadly in that situation.

A vehicle does not travel as fast as a bullet. Keep telling yourselves this so you can sleep better at night. Stricter laws will help. I think any irresponsible gun owner who lets their guns be taken and used in a crime, should do the same time as the person who use them. Maybe then, these guns will be under tighter control.

Steve:

Actually, according to this morning's news reports, *EVERYONE* was killed with the Bushmaster and not the handguns (although your point *WAS* being made by gun proponents all over the web over the last few days.)

Actualy Charles the US is not the most violent nation. The carribean and subsaharan Africa has much more violence.

ADAM LANZA was a victim? He may have had issues to deal with but a victim? NO, a murdered!
Don't label him as anything less than he should be forever known as. It should be embossed on his head stone for the world to know.

Just an Average Person, you maybe able to slow down violence but I fear you cannot stop it. As population increases so do incidents of misbehavior. Like the common cold all we can do is work on the issues.

The government takes my money so I cannot help myself. They want my rights, so I cannot control my life. Who am I left to blame?
Like rats in a cage, we are left for our keeper!

Patriot:

Have you ever noticed how many of these murders are committed by mentally unstable persons? Have you ever noticed which persons sound mentally unstable?

Atlant, people use to build motes around their castle to keep out danger. Didn't work, the moat created disease which ended up in the castle.

Patriot,
The proliferation of guns in America's is like your moat, constructed to protect, yet infestating the populace and causing more grief.

Exactly, problem here is everyone wants to answer the how question. How is an easy answer once the facts come out. The real question we should be asking is why.

But appropriate laws *CAN* prevent the intended murderer from having the means to commit the murder, and can especially prevent the murderer from having the means to commit *MASS MURDER*.

It's long-since time to pass such appropriate laws nationwide.

Alternatively, we could treat guns the same as we treat everything else of a similar, dangerous nature in this society:

Require the owners and operators to be appropriately trained, tested, and licensed and require them to carry appropriate liability insurance for *EVERY GUN PURCHASED*. Otherwise, we're just "externalizing" away from the gun owners certain costs associated with their gun ownership.

Atlant - if you somehow ban all the guns in the country then the psychopaths will use knives like in China (where 21 have been killed in school knife attacks recently), then what? ban knives? make restaurants chain the steak knives to the table? how am I supposed to cook at home without knives?

Do you see how silly that sounds? the solution isn't banning the weapon as there is always a different weapon that could be used just as effectively (knives, homemade explosives, power tools, cars, etc), the only long-term solution is better identification and treatment of the mentally ill (with incarceration for those that refuse treatment).

Have you see the stories about Adam Lanza from his former classmates and teachers?, he was obviously mentally ill and the system let him down, they let his mother down, and they let down the families of the twenty children he murdered.

Mark,
The "if you somehow ban all the guns..."
and the "if you somehoe tax everyone 100 percent..." arguments are irrelevant straw man arguments.

No one is suggesting banning all the weapons.

The problem is that there are too many guns in too many wrong hands right now.

Adam Lanza's mother was an enabler. She took her son shooting, she put guns in his hands. He knew where they were and how to get them. Bad judgement on her part resulted in the deaths of 26 innocent people.

It's the gun culture, the gun lobbyists that are are the problem. More guns is not the solution, it's the problem.

America is awash in guns and ammo. The government needs to have tighter restrictions regarding who gets guns, period.

Second amendment rights to not take precedent over the lives of innocent people.

Ray - Here's an interesting paper from the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. It is a long read but put across a good argument that banning firearms does nothing to reduce murder and suicide rates:

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

We know what the answer is.
We know what the problem is.
Too many guns in too many hands.
Adding more guns is not the answer, it's the problem.

We need gun control now, the reason it's "useless" is because the gun lobby and the politicians they own in the Republican Party make it useless

Is that an admission you deliberately make the laws useless?

Steve,
you bring up an interesting point.

There are many people who have guns that are experienced. Whether it's hunting, or a military or law enforcement. Allguns should be permitted, with a background check, and with more experienced persons mentoring and/or tutoring young people on gun safety.

Young people would not be irresponsibly shooting other young people if their mothers/fathers, mentors were there to promote gun safety. This is true in Lanza's case. His mother had too many guns, too much fire power. You don't leave your keys around for your unbalanced kid to joy ride around with your car, and in the same token, you secure your guns, and you don't take your unbalanced kid to the shooting range.

The other things we could do would be to deny guns to anyone with mental health problems, we know that if this was strictly enforced, the shooter in the Giffords shooting wold have been denied, as well as the shooters at Virginia Tech and Aurora. The problem is that even with background checks and a data base required, gun dealers in some states are not adhering to the law.