Mass Shooting at Connecticut Elementary School

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Diemen said:
Would you agree to mandating proper courses, training and tests before one could own such a weapon?
Click to expand...
Yes, I have stated earlier that I would be satisfied if such measures where taken. As long as the weapons that are in question are not illegal and can be obtained through such measures.
 
BoMac said:
A really, really tough read:


Mallick: Why Newtown victim Noah Pozner had an open coffin | Toronto Star
Click to expand...

I read the original stories (there were two) from the Jewish newspaper that published them. Very tough reads but very important reads. I think we as a society have a complete disconnect from carnage - embedded troop videos look like the video games we play and people become outraged whenever gruesome photographs of the dead are published. Remember the outcries about the people who jumped from the WTC? If the families are okay with the photos being published, we should not get to choose comfort over seeing reality before our eyes.

People who argue for no changes to gun laws (and let's not pretend like there are not many of them, from Congressmen to the NRA to various other groups and lobbyists) collectively sound extremely selfish to me. Background checks are a problem when Uncle Ted sells a gun to his nephew Teddy b/c it's an expensive and time-consuming hassle? Selfish. And that's a very common argument going around.
 
Eighties said:
Yes, I have stated earlier that I would be satisfied if such measures where taken. As long as the weapons that are in question are not illegal and can be obtained through such measures.
Click to expand...

The problem with the gun control debate in this country is that, by all accounts, the vast majority of gun owners and NRA members support reasonable stances like yours (i.e. mandatory training, universal background checks, etc), but the leadership of the NRA simply refuse to acknowledge it and respond to any perceived threat to their stances with rhetoric so extreme (they're coming to take our guns!) it prevents any reasonable debate from taking place.
 
LemonMelon said:
I find concealed weapons as upsetting as assault rifles, to be honest. If you require a weapon to defend your property, why does it need to be a concealed?
Click to expand...

Isn't the idea that you're allowed a concealed weapon so that you're not running around the neighbourhood, waving it around? I think it has more to do with being discreet than it does with being sneaky.
 
Sandy Hook chorus last night, I started crying even before they started singing

I missed the Mayors Against Illegal guns ad

And as for mental health issues, most statistics and experts say that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people who are not mentally ill. That most mentally ill people act out against themselves - that would include suicide.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
And as for mental health issues, most statistics and experts say that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people who are not mentally ill. That most mentally ill people act out against themselves - that would include suicide.
Click to expand...

Then would it not be more honest for the anti-gun side to not focus so much attention on the crimes where mental health was clearly a factor?
 
just heard there was an armed robbery on saturday at our local supermarket - some guy with a gun - have never heard of anything like that here... bit scary... would have no clue how to handle that...
 
anitram said:
I read the original stories (there were two) from the Jewish newspaper that published them. Very tough reads but very important reads. I think we as a society have a complete disconnect from carnage - embedded troop videos look like the video games we play and people become outraged whenever gruesome photographs of the dead are published.
Click to expand...

I think that's such an important point, and one reason among many that we're so desensitized to violence. I read those articles about Noah's open casket, even though I didn't want to and didn't think I could handle it. I knew I had to, if that makes any sense. I understand why his mother did that, even though I have no earthly idea how she ever got through seeing that. Or how she'll ever get through remembering that for the rest of her life. The loss of her child in that way is impossible enough. But I understand her and admire her so much.

On a different topic- I think it could be argued that abused women are the most endangered group via guns, when their abuser owns a weapon. Legally or not.

Huffington Post

Around noon on New Year’s Eve, Laura Ponce got the phone call she had dreaded for years. Her daughter, Laura Acevez, 21, had been found unconscious in her apartment in Eureka Springs, Ark., lying in a pool of blood. Her 5-month-old son was discovered uninjured next to her body.

Acevez, described by her family as a gentle mother with a near-constant smile, worked at a Tyson Foods factory deboning chicken, but had dreams of becoming a nurse. She did not make it to 2013. She died in the hospital that night, leaving behind three young children. A .22 caliber bullet was found lodged in her skull.

Local police tracked down her ex-boyfriend, Victor Acuna-Sanchez, an 18-year-old under a court order to stay away from Acevez stemming from two prior domestic battery arrests.

Police found Acuna-Sanchez hiding in the shower at his mother’s cabin, armed with a .22-caliber handgun -- a gun he never should have been able to own.

As Ponce tells it, Acuna-Sanchez harassed her daughter from the moment the two started dating. He allegedly strangled her, viciously beat her with a baseball bat and dragged her behind a car. The last week before she was killed, Acevez told her mother that he smashed the front windshield of her car with a hammer and poured bleach in her gas tank while his infant son watched. Ponce also says he emotionally tormented her daughter, warning her over and over that he would kill her and her kids if she went to the police.

Under federal law, individuals who have been convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence offense or who are subject to a domestic violence restraining order can’t legally buy or possess firearms. But an estimated 30 to 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check, making thorough enforcement of the law all but impossible.

“Gun sellers have no way of knowing if someone is a domestic abuser unless there is a background check,” says Jonathan Lowy, director of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence's Legal Action Project. “This is a real problem.”

As the national spotlight has turned to gun violence in the wake of the Newtown, Conn. massacre, in Congress, there has been some discussion of how gun reform can help domestically abused women. Last week, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) -- chief sponsor of the Violence Against Women Act, expected to be reconsidered this week -- made the connection between gun violence and domestic violence. Leahy testified in a hearing that in states that require background checks for handgun sales, 38 percent fewer women are shot by their partners.

Yet others have argued that more firearm regulations would make it harder for women to protect themselves -- that guns make women more safe, not less.

The evidence paints a much different picture.

According to 2010 FBI data, firearms -- and specifically handguns -- are the most common weapons used to murder women. In the U.S., 64 percent of women who are murdered each year die at the hands of a family member or intimate partner. In situations involving domestic violence, having a gun in the home makes a woman eight times more likely to be killed.

Through Google and Nexis searches, The Huffington Post has tracked gun-related homicides and accidents throughout the U.S. since the schoolhouse massacre in Newtown, Conn., on the morning of Dec. 14.

In the first eight weeks after the school shooting, more than 90 women were shot to death by their partners or family members.

In Tucson, a woman was shot and killed in a parking lot by a man against whom she had a restraining order. In Minnesota, a man shot his wife and sawed her body into pieces after she told him she was leaving him.

In California, a heated argument at a bus stop ended when a husband shot his wife, then turned the gun on himself in front of a handful of bystanders. It was 11 a.m. In Florida, a woman was found shot twice in the torso, her boyfriend lying nearby with a single shot to the head. The couple was on the verge of breaking up, family members reported.

In Idaho, a man called 911 to confess to shooting his wife. As police arrived at his home, they heard a single gunshot as he took his own life. In Kansas, a child called the police to report gunfire. When officers arrived at the rural farmhouse, they found a husband and wife dead in a murder-suicide, and the child hiding in a closet.

An alarming study from 2002 found that while the U.S. represented around 32 percent of the female population among 25 high-income countries, it accounted for 84 percent of all female firearm homicides. “The difference in female homicide victimization rates between the U.S. and these other industrialized nations is very large and is closely tied to levels of gun ownership,” explained lead author David Hemenway.

Rita Smith, executive director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, says she is convinced universal background checks would help keep guns away from domestic abusers. “Seeing as 58 percent of domestic violence homicides are committed with firearms, I think there’s a very high likelihood if we go to universal background checks, including private sales, we are going to reduce deaths," she told The Huffington Post.

Still, the National Rifle Association continues to oppose universal background checks.

Even if such measures were to become a reality, law enforcement would face another major barrier: how to get already-purchased guns out of the hands of abusers.

Under federal law, convicted domestic abusers are advised by the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to “immediately dispose of their firearms and ammunition,” but unless the state implements a law to actually seize their guns, such notices often go unheeded.

Jayne Ann Kita, director of the Arkansas Coalition Against Domestic Violence, explains the ineffectiveness of the law. “It’s an unfunded mandate,” she says. “In Arkansas there’s been some discussion but there is no organized system for the removal of those weapons or a place to keep them. There is no one charged with that responsibility.”

Women who are concerned about a domestic abuser owning a gun illegally have limited recourse, according to Kita. “We advise they mention it to a judge and ask for the guns to be turned in, and make local law enforcement aware of any guns,” she says.

But Acevez's mother believes that alerting the police about illegal guns did little to save her daughter.

“I told [the police] he has guns. Not one, but many,” Ponce says. “The whole town knew. They had everything in their hands to stop him and they did nothing.”

Acuna-Sanchez previously had been charged with aggravated assault and third-degree battery for two alleged attacks against Acevez. Three weeks before her death, he was arrested for violating a no-contact order. Despite a long record of domestic violence against Acevez, he was released without bail. Carroll County Sheriff Bob Grudek did not return multiple calls for comment.

Ponce blames the local authorities for not taking the threat against her daughter more seriously. If police had confiscated his firearms, she says, maybe her daughter would still be alive.

“She was beat up many, many times. But this last time, he premeditated everything and he brought a gun. He decided that was going to be the end of it,” she says.

According to Ponce, the final confrontation came after Acuna-Sanchez learned Acevez was saving money to move out of town in an effort to escape him. She did not get the chance.

Her mother is now the primary caretaker for two of Acevez's children: Josie, who is 7, and her baby boy with Acuna-Sanchez, Jordan, who she says screams in his sleep. “The doctor thinks he’s remembering, even though he’s so small,” she says. “He saw everything.” Acevez’s other son, 5-year-old Christopher, is staying with his father.

Ponce is accepting clothing donations on a Facebook page in remembrance of Acevez, and community members have flooded the page with memories of the young mother.

“Everyone loved her,” Ponce says. “She always had a smile on her face. She never had any trouble with the law. Loving this guy, that was her biggest mistake.”
 
Acuna-Sanchez previously had been charged with aggravated assault and third-degree battery for two alleged attacks against Acevez. Three weeks before her death, he was arrested for violating a no-contact order. Despite a long record of domestic violence against Acevez, he was released without bail. Carroll County Sheriff Bob Grudek did not return multiple calls for comment.
Click to expand...

I'm fully on board with trying to do everything imaginable to keep these domestic abusers from obtaining and owning guns, but this is another thing that drives me nucking futs, too. If someone has a record of this kind of behavior, telling them, "Don't go near this person anymore" isn't going to cut it-clearly they don't care much about following the law as it is, given that they're committing violent acts against people they claim they love.

To me this says that we need to enact MUCH tougher, MUCH more severe punishments for these people. Forget restraining orders, if they commit abuse or are violent with their threats and harassment, then automatically throw them in jail for a really, really, REALLY long time. Like, years, decades (if not life). People who are that violent are not going to change easily, if at all-and most of them never do change. So solving the problem of them being able to freely roam the streets to begin with would also certainly help cut down on these situations a hell of a lot, I'd think.
 
Eighties said:
This is what a Sandy Hook father said to congress.
SANDY HOOK FATHER OWNS CONGRESS - YouTube
Click to expand...

With all due sympathies etc. to his loss, this man is fucking delusional. I truly have no idea how he can think this way after what occurred to his own child. Would that same evil man have been able to kill 26 people in that time with a knife or a hammer?

Jesus, if America was founded 10,000 years ago you'd get people today trying to uphold the right for a husband to kill all his wives with a rock.
 
The Sad Punk said:
With all due sympathies etc. to his loss
Click to expand...

What loss? He's using the death of his daughter's "classmate's little sister" for some sort of credibility.
And his douchey inflection made me want to slap him across the face. I fully expected him to stand up and high five all his buddies at the end.

"..tyrants especially..." well, we all know what kind of delusions this guy is harbouring
 
I was most baffled by his comment "there's no registration, no permitting, no background checks"... fair enough if he personally wants to keep his guns, that's his prerogative, but he's happy for any American to just be able to walk into a gun shop, hand over some cash and walk out with a gun, no questions asked? What the fuck?
 
Cobbo, how are we supposed to take you seriously if you don't slam your fist to the desk at the end of what you're saying and close your briefcase like a total badass?

(you know in his head, he was picturing a totally awesome explosion happening behind him as he walked away)
 
I do worry for the States sometimes. I hope I don't sound too condescending but I feel like you just don't see as many backwards opinions here in Australia. Even the far right here think the NRA are fucking nutjobs.
 
In my not so humble opinion about the only advantage we have over them is compulsory voting, and the present generation would give that away in a heartbeat if the offer were made.

There are ways of taming the extremes.

Well ok, it's not all about that, this country lacks the infusion of Puritanism that shaped the early American scene.
 
cobl04 said:
I was most baffled by his comment "there's no registration, no permitting, no background checks"... fair enough if he personally wants to keep his guns, that's his prerogative, but he's happy for any American to just be able to walk into a gun shop, hand over some cash and walk out with a gun, no questions asked? What the fuck?
Click to expand...


That's just fucking called Freedom. Something NON-AMERICANS can't understand.

Look it up.
 
Freedom isn't free you know.....buck o'five I reckon it costs.....
 
Diemen said:
The problem with the gun control debate in this country is that, by all accounts, the vast majority of gun owners and NRA members support reasonable stances like yours (i.e. mandatory training, universal background checks, etc), but the leadership of the NRA simply refuse to acknowledge it and respond to any perceived threat to their stances with rhetoric so extreme (they're coming to take our guns!) it prevents any reasonable debate from taking place.
Click to expand...

How true. Quinnipiac just published the results of polling they did on this issue (National (US) Poll * February 7, 2013 * Americans Back Women In Combat for the basics). Some results are surprising:
The Quinnipac poll also finds that 92 percent of Americans, including 89 percent of Republicans, supports requiring a background check for all would be gun buyers. Fifty six percent support banning assault weapons and high capacity magazine clips.
Click to expand...
Also from the Quinnipiac poll, this is critical:

Who do you think better reflects your views on guns, President Obama or the National Rifle Association?

Obama: 43

NRA: 46

Okay, so nine in 10 Americans supports universal background checks, and solid majorities back the assault ban, both of which are opposed by the NRA and regularly characterized by the organization as gun-grabbing tyranny — yet people think the NRA better represents their views. There’s been a lot of chortling on the right about the NRA’s favorability ratings, but this poll makes it plain: People don’t have any idea what the NRA really stands for.
Click to expand...
(those quotes are from The Morning Plum: GOP resolve on sequester begins to crack )

It looks to me that gun owners and gun lovers (and the U.S.A. as a whole) are better off without the NRA that with such an influential, extremist and out-of-touch organization.
 
Popmartijn said:
It looks to me that gun owners and gun lovers (and the U.S.A. as a whole) are better off without the NRA that with such an influential, extremist and out-of-touch organization.
Click to expand...


The problem is that the NRA is widely considered to be just about the most powerful lobby in Washington. They may really only represent the gun industry, and not gun owners, but they are feared in Congress.
 
And that poll shows just how gullable, ignorant and/or stupid a majority of Americans are when it comes to actually following the issues, and the statements an organization makes.
 
BEAL said:
... shows just how gullable, ignorant and/or stupid a majority of Americans are when it comes to actually following the issues, and the statements an organization makes.
Click to expand...

AP120404022036.jpg


:yes:
 
Kind of like WMDs and Al Qaeda in Iraq.


NRA doesn't want universal background checks because it means fewer gun sales
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 3 Listening Thread
3 4 5
Replies
133
Views
5K
iron yuppie
iron yuppie
A
The Little Stranger chapter 14
Replies
0
Views
519
annj
A
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 2 Listening Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
6K
namkcuR
N
A
The little stranger chapter 19
Replies
0
Views
858
annj
A
A
The little stranger chapter 8
Replies
0
Views
517
annj
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom