TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 8 °C Thursday 23 May, 2013

Column: Despite the Newtown massacre, America’s sickening gun culture lives on

After Newtown, Larry Donnelly was optimistic that the US might work towards stricter gun laws – but news that a ban on assault weapons has been removed from the legislation currently being considered has caused him to lose hope.

Larry Donnelly

JUST OVER THREE months ago, a troubled 20-year-old man shot to death twenty children and six adults in Newtown, Connecticut. Americans, and indeed the rest of the world, were shocked by the latest in a string of mass murders using high-powered weapons in the US. The facts that the Newtown massacre took place in the supposedly safe haven of a school, and that so many of the victims were young children, made it even more horrifying. The fact that that the massacre was perpetrated with weapons that were owned legally provoked outrage in many quarters and prompted calls for stricter gun control laws, including a renewal of the expired ban on assault weapons in the US.

Uncharacteristically, President Barack Obama was visibly emotional and actually tearful in the wake of the tragedy. He subsequently argued forcefully that there was a need “to take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics;” claimed that he would use “whatever power this office holds” to this end; and maintained that gun control would be a “central issue” in his second term. He also established a gun violence task force to be led by Vice President Joe Biden.

‘Everything should be on the table’

Additionally, and even more significantly, Democratic politicians from gun-friendly states, such as US Senator Joe Manchin from West Virginia, signalled that they were open to stricter gun laws. Senator Manchin stated that “[T]his (Newtown) has changed the dialogue… everything should be on the table… I don’t know anybody in the sporting or hunting arena that goes out with an assault rifle.” This marked the first occasion the resolutely pro-gun Senator Manchin ever wobbled. Meanwhile, the extremely powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) went into hiding, only to emerge several days later with a ludicrous and widely panned suggestion that armed police officers should be present in every American school.

Senator Dianne Feinstein of California announced that she would seek to reinstate the assault weapon ban that had been in effect from 1994 to 2004, when it lapsed. And the polls conducted after the Newtown massacre occurred revealed that 55 per cent of Americans were supportive of the ban. Many observers believed that the one positive outcome of an horrific tragedy would be stricter, more sensible gun laws in the US. I was one of them. In December, I expressed hope in my regular IrishCentral.com column and on George Hook’s Newstalk radio programme that Newtown could be a “game changer” on the gun issue.

Removing assault weapon ban to save package

I was very wrong, unfortunately. This week, US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that a ban on assault weapons was being removed from a package of gun control measures currently being considered on Capitol Hill. The tactical reason for doing so is that the proponents of an assault weapons ban don’t have the votes, and the entire package of legislation – tougher background checks, harsher punishments for trafficking in guns, enhanced school safety measures, etc. – could fall as a result. Senator Reid is in the business of counting votes and, as of now, even after Newtown, less than 40 out of 100 US Senators support a ban on assault weapons. As one newspaper editorial opined, “Wayne LaPierre of the NRA is smiling.”

Perhaps my glaring political miscalculation can be explained by the fact that I don’t really understand the US gun culture any better than people do on this side of the Atlantic. Growing up in Boston, I can count on one hand the number of relatives, neighbours and friends who owned any kind of firearm – and the few who did were generally regarded as somewhat eccentric. Ironically, the first time I ever handled and fired a gun was here in the West of Ireland on the land behind my cousin’s home. He’s an avid hunter, but it wasn’t for me. If I was from another part of the country, however, it might be an altogether different story.

If Newtown won’t provoke stricter gun laws, what will?

Back in the US, proponents of an assault weapons ban are disappointed, yet believe that tighter regulation of background checking for gun purchasers will be approved by this Congress. Some, like Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, have recognised from an early stage that an assault weapon ban was destined to be an “uphill battle” and “a marathon effort, not a sprint.” I only wish that I was similarly undaunted.

If less than 40 US Senators favour a ban on assault weapons in the immediate aftermath of the slaughter of innocent children and teachers, can such a ban ever pass? Crucially, the Newtown massacre was carried out with guns that were owned legally. One would think this reality fatally undermines the NRA’s mantra that guns used to perpetrate violence are almost always obtained illegally and, as such, gun control is futile. Yet still, only a minority of elected officials in the upper house of the US Congress is willing to cross the line in the sand the NRA has drawn on assault weapons.

After Newtown, I was optimistic that the US might commence a steady, albeit slow, arduous and hard fought, journey toward gun laws and policies that the rest of the civilised world would regard as sane. I’m no longer optimistic. I despair.

Larry Donnelly is a Law Lecturer at NUI Galway.

Read next:

Comments (107 Comments)

  • Canada has at least the same number of guns per head of population as the USA, but they are renowned for not shooting each other.

    Reply
  • The situation in Ireland is that the country is awash with illegal weapons being used by criminals. Saying we don’t have that problem is false. The criminals are not filling out the licence, going the Garda barracks with their I.d. and paying the fee.

    Reply
  • If push comes to shove most people would use any weapon at their desposal if their life or the lives of their family and home was in danger,its a basic human right to defend yourself if threatned,if you choose not to do so thats also your choice,either way there are consequences.

    Reply
  • The problem with laws such as those proposed, for anyone who knows anything about firearms, is that they would not have prevented a massacre like the Newtown tragedy. All firearms have the capacity to be used to kill, there are many firearms lawfully sold in Ireland that would have given the Newtown murder the ability to murder so many.
    The only way to prevent such acts would be to limit the ownership of firearms to such an extent that infringe the basics rights that many people in a country like Ireland would take for granted. Even then, psychopaths would find some other way of killing. Think about it, the world wasn’t exactly peaceful before the development of firearms.

    Reply
    • Look at the fella in Belgium who went on a killing spree with an automatic AK-47 and a satchel of hand grenades. All of which are currently highly illegal in Belgium. He also previously acquired an anti-tank RPG on his own. If someone really wants powerful weapons they will get them. Easing the symptoms doesn’t equate to a cure.

      Reply
    • In fairness though it is a lot easier to kill a lot of people with an assault rifle than with, for example, a revolver or pump-action shotgun.

      Reply
    • @ Captain Rock

      Eh? What ‘basic rights’ are you on about being ‘infringed’ if people aren’t allowed to buy firearms? (Let’s say excepting farmers etc having shotguns – pretty easy to control.)

      What ‘basic right’ do we have, or need, as civilians, to hold a range of military grade automatic weapons, in our homes, for deployment within seconds??

      What kind of society is that? I’ll tell you – a seriously bloody mentally ill one. One at war with itself. Which is just how the divide-and-rule top few percent elites like it.

      Reply
    • Erm, here is Mike Hall in full ignorance again. Automatic weapons are not legal since forever.

      Reply
  • NRA – The only way to stop a bad guy with a guy is a good guy with a gun, says it all really.

    Reply
    • What would you stop him with? Kind words and understanding?

      Reply
    • you seem to be missing the point terry.
      the idea was, i think, to reduce the availability of guns, thus reduce the potential number of “bad guys with guns”.
      fighting fire with fire does work.obviously.. but if you can prevent the fire in the first place why make it harder on yourself?

      Reply
    • @terry, stop him getting the gun in the first place

      Reply
    • Henry how does one stop someone that is using a gun gotten illegally? Customs Officers,Border Control Officers, DEA Agents, FBI Agents and all the forces available to the US government can’t stop people and drugs from crossing the border so how are they going to stop illegal weapons from coming across?

      Reply
    • It works in Ireland, why wouldn’t it work in the US? <— sarcasm.

      Reply
    • well i cannot claim to have studied mathematics or be a wiz with numbers, Mick.
      but it seems to me that, if you reduce the availability of weapons to be acquired legally you will by default reduce the availability of weapons in general.
      there will always be illegal weapons.. but those numbers should decrease since they would be harder to acquire.
      maybe someone else can post an equation or draw a graph of sorts of to prove the point with numbers (i’m nearly sure there is a way to do this)

      Reply
    • Do you two think most criminals hold guns legally for the purpose of commiting crimes? The liberal hippy buzz has you well brainwashed.

      Reply
    • It works in ireland as ww are not saturated already with gun legal and illegal.

      The only way to fix it in america is to ban everything then go after those who fail to hand guns over. If needs be make them hand guns over by pointing a gun at them.

      Some americans are smart but some think saddam was behind 9/11 its that rednecks culture keeping guns legal.

      Not our problem its theirs but if guns were legal here id be protesting on streets

      Reply
    • Youdontknowme….. if going to make a comparison between ireland and the usa when it comes to guns being illegally imported then you sir are a fool.

      Reply
    • youdontknowme guns are legal here lol

      Reply
    • Arm good people to shoot NRA….

      Reply
    • Terry, I you seem to have missed the point of this article. The guns used in this and other massacres were acquired legally. Illegal guns are hard to get almost by definition so clamping down on the legal guns would make a difference. It might not make a huge difference but what alternative would you suggest?

      Reply
    • Youdontknowme. One very big problem with your solution to ban all guns in the US. Its a thing called the Constitution and in that document is the Second Amendment. Something the vast majority of Americans will not even consider in their wildest dreams of touching.

      Reply
    • Nothing has changed…. Shootings everyday still… Constitution written when British empire was dominant…. How many years ago?? Its sick…. Society is twisted…. Kids staying at home… AT HOME playing video games is the root…. They should be out doing drugs or other not too good things… But to protect themselves, NRA are will to sell them guns and ammo…. At a profit of course, to protect everyone… This is USA, land of freedom and opportunity, the only part of that I would take is Freedom, to get the hell out of there….

      Reply
    • I agree, Mick. I’m not a fan of guns and would probably never carry one or own one personally, even though I’m married to a police officer and probably should just due to the nature of his job. But I know many liberals who are against gun bans and own guns themselves. I don’t have a problem with some regulation, but even I would be terrified to live in this country if they took away people’s right to bear arms. The Constitution works for the most part and was implemented for a reason. Without it, the damage to our country as a whole would be far worse than the gun violence we have.

      Reply
    • @ Henry Sanner.
      Ireland is the prize example that refutes your logic. 1972 we technically banned handguns,rifles over .22 and strictly liscensed the rest to prevent the PIRA from arming themselves off the Irish citizenry.This was supposed to be a tempoary custody order for 31 days.That lasted 35 years!!!.However the PIRA and loyalists not much bothered by this law went to the Continent,the USA and Libya and armed themselves up pretty sharpiish,or built their own guns in machine shops in both NI and the Republic.End result 35 years of terror ,still ongoing more or less and a the onlt people that suffered were the Irish shooting public.End result reducing the lawfully held amount of arms doesnt work,criminals will always aquire what they want or need in firepower.

      Reply
  • Em the US is miles away. I don’t like it when and if foreign countries tell Ireland how hey should run their society. I know most here on the journal don’t like it either.

    Reply
  • The entire article is based on a factually incorrect assertion that high powered assault weapons were used in the Newtown massacre. The initial reports of this were later found to be incorrect. A number of handguns were found in the school, no assault weapons were used in the murders.
    There are lots of reports detailing this eg
    http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/01/cbs-nbc-abc-admit-no-assault-rifle-used-at-sandy-hook-2546018.html
    It is also known that there is a clear correlation between anti psychotic drugs routinely prescribed to children in the us and these massacres. Such massacres are also performed by serving police officers (chris Dorner) and ex military who minds were warped through tours of duty in far flung lands. Gun control would not apply to such individuals, but would apply to civilians.
    The author despairs that an assault weapons ban is not immediately introduced. I despair that a law lecturer cannot get basic publicly known facts correct before publishing his article.

    Reply
    • Think you’re incorrect about the guns used. This lists an assault weapon as being one of the weapons used in the shootings: http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284&A=4226

      Just on the point that gun control would not apply to mentally ill people – presumably that’s where background checks come in whereby anyone deemed to be mentally ill would not be allowed purchase guns.

      Reply
    • Dave 22/03/13 #

      A .223-caliber Bushmaster XM15-E2S semi-automatic assault rifle with a 30 round magazine was used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

      Reply
    • I seem to never get an answer to this question: what is an ‘assault weapon’?

      Reply
    • Dave, what is the significance of this gun being ‘semi-automatic’? Every gun since civil war musket is a semi-automatic. Squeeze once, one bullet comes out.

      Reply
    • Dave 22/03/13 #

      An assault weapon was used in the school shooting mentioned, you said one wasn’t. An assault weapon is a military-grade firearm. In this case it was a semi-automatic only assault rifle, without selective fire (automatic), which the majority of assault rifles posses but not all. What is significant about the gun being ‘semi-automatic’? It’s a description of the firearm. The difference between fully-automatic and semi-automatic rifle is very important. Happy now?

      Reply
    • That is loads of waffle Dave. Military grade, bollox. Bushmaster xm15 used in the shooting is not military grade as it does not have burst or automatic fire capability. Burst and auto are illegal for civilian ownership so referring to a weapon as being semi-automatic is pretty pointless in the context of this debate. Take burst and auto away and you are down to cosmetic similarity to military assault rifles and this is the kind of level of (mis)understanding demonstrated by most uninitiated types on the net. Now, going to a ‘gun free zone’ scenario, burst and auto are indeed the features that would make difference to the body count. Unopposed against civilians I could come with a bog standard Glock with several magazines of ammo with the same effect as the said university and cinema shootings. . Unless we are talking about long distance shooting in which case a bog standard deer hunting rifle will do. This has nothing to do with assault rifle ban whatever the hell that means.

      Reply
    • Dave 23/03/13 #

      In fact, cosmetics is also a part of why these firearms are branded ‘assault rifles’. Which you obviously don’t seem to understand. The Bushmaster XM15-E2S cannot be sold to civilians with selective fire (automatic & burst), but that doesn’t take away the fact it is built as ‘military grade’. So, you keep asking people ‘what is an assault weapon’… Do you even know yourself?

      Reply
    • I don’t seem to understand?? ROFL. Take away burst and auto and all you are left with is the cosmetics! This was exactly my point mate and if you failed to understand, this is not my fault. There are three basic aspects to a weapon design. Precision, firing rate and magazine capacity. Take away firing rate and you are left with precision and magazine capacity. In the context of mass murder in a university, mall or cinema environment, this ‘assault rifle’ is no different from magazine based hand gun. So ban the XM15 and still you could walk into a mall with two Glocks and a couple of pre-loaded magazines and do the same damage. Granted, precision of a Glock due to barrel length is lesser than that of XM15 but in close combat this is not an issue and can be compensated by practice of the shooter. There are other aspects such as reliability in humid and dusty environments but this is irrelevant in a university / mall environment. The only aspect that can make a hell of a difference is the firing rate and this one is limited by not allowing burst / auto firing on civilian weapons. To cut a long story short, buddy, cosmetics is the only factor which makes ‘assault rifle’ different from hunting rifles with magazines. In the previous assault weapons ban and also in the one proposed in 2013 the magazine size was limited to 10. As already pointed out to you, in an environment where nobody is shooting back this limitation makes absolutely no difference as the shooter has ample time (5 secs is required with practice) to replace the magazine. This only reduces your chances if you are being fired at while reloading. Buddy, I have used various military weapons and hand guns and trained in various environments, this is why your entire narrative sounds rather silly. Previous assault weapons ban and the one newly proposed makes absolutely no difference in the context of mass shootings. Take away burst and auto and your ‘military grade’ classification is silly. Saying that these are civilian versions of military rifles has as much sense as saying that little girl pink bedrooms are civilian versions of military prisons.

      Reply
    • The gunman who killed 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school last December fired 154 rounds in less than five minutes, selecting high capacity magazines from a home arsenal stocked with swords, knives and a cache of guns, officials have said.

      Reply
  • ‘Sickening’ gun culture ???

    I din’t see anything sickening about the culture.
    There are a few nutters who live there and abuse weapons, but sure we have had that for 80 years in this country and we call it Nationalism.

    Reply
  • Americans just quote their second ammendment rights as the reason why they have guns.

    It’s so they can fight the tyrannical government if they ever need to don’t you know….

    Reply
  • Dave 22/03/13 #

    I asked an American friend of mine would he not sacrifice guns, or at least assault rifles, in light of these mass shooting tragedies? He replied by saying that more people need guns, so that when a mass shooting is in-progress a member of the public can fight back with a gun there and then! He went on to say that banning guns on commercial airlines is ‘dangerous’, because if a hijacking occurred in mid-air no one would be able to fight back!

    They’re a different breed those Americans.

    Reply
    • There is a weird logic to those statements, and that’s why I think focussing on Newtown misses the point. As awful as it was, it’s much less significant in numbers than the thousands of urban shootings. Much of that is pissed off people settling their arguments with the most lethal thing to hand. They’re much less likely to do it if all they have is a bread knife.

      Reply
    • Dave 22/03/13 #

      I’d be more worried about your ‘weird logic’.

      Reply
  • I work in between two guys who support the right to have assault weapons. Sometimes I have to walk away when they start talking. 2 dumb shits that frustrate me to no end.

    Reply
    • Why did I get red thumbs for stating a fact? It’s well known around my office that they are dumb.

      Reply
    • Maybe because you are a dumber shit than they are?????

      Reply
    • Arthuer, nasty this evening. Do you know me? Do you know these two guys? Do you know the people in my office? F%#^ you!

      Reply
    • I can bet 5 years of my military career that you have no idea what is meant by ‘assault weapon’.

      Reply
    • Dom, I’m well aware of what a assault weapon is. I have been listening to the debate over here. You don’t know what I think about all this.

      Reply
    • Great. So what is an ‘assault weapon’?

      Reply
    • Why don’t you reflect on those 20 children who were murdered. I will ask the fool beside me who went out and paid extra to buy one because he thinks Obama is going to take away something that he did not have in the first place.
      Btw, his wife thinks that he is dumb as well. She told me so.

      Reply
    • What is an ‘assault weapon’?

      Reply
    • Likewise Declan.You just seem to be another ignorant little Irishman blowinto America with a BIG opinion on a subject you know SFA about!1 If you dont like it why dont you leave,and TBH I’d rather have the company of those two lads than your ignorant excretions,so Fuk you too politely!!

      Reply
    • His wife told you so??What are you doing sleeping with her ????

      Reply
    • Arthuer, I came over here in 1988 on a green card. I got my american citizenship in 1996. As you are well aware the second amendment gives you the right to bear arms. The first amendment gives us the right to free speech, both you and I. So as a citizen of the United States of America with the right to that first amendment let me tell you to go “Double F#%^ yourself”
      Btw I don’t have a problem with people having guns, even assault weapons but I do have a problem with innocent children being murdered with guns in the hands of a lunatic!
      I’m sure that you would agree with me on that.
      Also with regards to being a blow in I’m sure some native Americans feel that way about you.
      I live here, I work here and I pay my taxes.
      It’s you who is being ignorant about me, the office that I work in and the people I work with.
      I also spent a year on the reserve Defence forces in Ireland. So I know and have fired several types of weapons including a machine gun.
      Btw
      Did I tell you to go F}#% yourself!

      Reply
    • Oh great Declan so you are a guest in MY country,and you are off abusing MY countries privilidges and rights.
      I just happen to be a natural born in the CONUS ,so go home “Mick” if you dont like it!! You pay taxes and work here good on one you arent sitting around on welfare sponging out of our pockets and what you want, a medal for paying taxes???

      So allow me to make use of the 1st amendment as well Likewise!!! and your Momma and Sister and your Dog.

      You are changing your tune all of a sudden.Now you have “no problem” with gun ownership,just people talking about them at work?Well DUH to your point about loons shooting up schoolyards with them..However there is over 20 thousand statutes,laws ,ordinances and what not in the US about gun ownership on the books.Maybe if these were ENFORCED first,that just might prevent criminals and nutters getting their hands on them???
      You really need to learn more about MY countries gun laws.
      OH so you were in the Free Clothes Association were you??As the RDF was known back then.
      You fired a machine gun…..OOO!!! I’m impressed!! And that makes you an expert on firearms and American gun laws???My what a big EGO we have!!
      And you still dont know the difference between an assault rifle and a semi auto rifle????
      Any person that has served in a REAL army could answer that in a second.

      Reply
    • Artheur, we don’t have mace in the post office. It’s pepper spray. The fact that you think that these guys might go postal on me backs up my argument more then yours.
      Btw I happen to enjoy living in the USA. I have grown to appreciate this country and what it has to offer.
      I don’t ask for a medal because I pay taxes. I’m letting you know that as a citizen I have the same rights as you and I’m not going to let you put me down. That’s what you want to do.
      I stand by my original comment.
      Maybe you can tell me a little about yourself as I have done for you.

      Reply
    • Btw arthuer, you refer to me as a Mick but I never brought up the nationality of the two guys I work with.

      Reply
    • Also, I’ve never abused the rights and privileges of living in the US. In the years I’ve lived here I’ve only gotten one speeding ticket- for going 10 miles over the speed limit on the interstate. We all do that right.
      So my record is clean.
      Any other insults that you might like to throw at me?

      Reply
  • Americans think its their god given right to bear arms because its written in the constitution…after that awful massacre in CT my middle class neighbours reaction was that if the teachers had guns it would have been better. And then they all proceeded to say everyone should have a gun. That attitude is never going to change. It’s not just the nut jobs and criminals who have guns here its everyone and that will never change

    Reply
  • How will you enforce a ban on assault weapons? Will there be door-to-door searches? (I can see that working well)

    The assault weapons thing is an urban-rural divider. People do go hunting with AR-15 “assault” rifles. In the cities, women are the ones buying hand guns in large numbers.

    The NRA is ridiculous but the reality is that newtown was a game changer: gun sales have reached unprecedented heights with people who would never have considered buying a gun rushing to the store because they’re afraid the government is going to legislate.

    More people die from car crashes or drowning each year. Only 35% of the US population can swim.

    Reply
  • @ Larry Donnelly Law Lecturer at NUI Galway. Go home to Boston ,its missing its IDIOT!!!
    You are as dumb as a box of rocks if you think that 360 million firearms are going to be handed in,and that any such law was ever going to be obeyed in the US. It was a typical knee jerk reaction by a president who specialises in knee jerk reactions,along with his democrat gun bannning crazies.Go home to Boston one of the high crime gun banned cities in the USA .

    Reply
    • Arthuer, why don’t you think about those 20 children who were murdered that day in newtown? Think long and hard about the terror that they went through. Think about their parents as well.
      The problem with people like you is, you want society to break down so you can use your guns.
      This article is about people like you.

      Reply
    • @ Declan Noonan. Declan , I dont think NRA members are in the buisness of reflecting on such matters..
      As a father of two small children I cannot imagine them attending a school where teachers are armed to the teeth. ( to counter assault guns they would have to be) Teachers have more than enough to do as it is.

      Reply
    • You see, people like Declan must remember that this article is about the USA.
      They should inform themselves about the regulations before throwing out comments about Ireland.
      I think it’s getting a bit too personal.

      Reply
    • Yuba, how so? What’s your point?

      Reply
    • Yuba, was I throwing out a comment about Ireland?
      Btw, I was born and grew up in Dublin and now live in the USA. I know both countries although I am somewhat out of touch about home because I only get to go home once a year.

      Reply
  • The solution is not in gun laws but in adequate action to identify mentally ill on time and place them under supervision and treatment. Also concealed carrying of guns should be allowed as it is proven that good guys with guns stop lunatics with guns before the death toll becomes significant.

    On the other hand, the widespread desire to disarm Amerians stems not from care for potential victims but from patological anti-Americanism.

    Reply
    • Dom, really?! Can you please explain why police officers get shot and killed while on duty when they have guns themselves?

      Reply
    • Policeman is a target. A citizen with concealed gun is not.

      Reply
    • Dom, my point is that a police officer with a gun was not able to protect himself in these instances.
      Btw, there has just been another shooting a marine base- 3 dead. Should we start locking up marines now? They are a close group of people who can’t even protect themselves from each other. The police responded to the incident. The shooter was a marine himself.

      Reply
    • The point was not that a gun will protect a policeman, the point was that an armed citizen will most likely be able to stop an armed madman. This has happened in a significant number of cases but unhindered mass murders as a rule take place in ‘gun free’ zones.

      Reply
    • Dom, is a army base a gun free zone? Was Virginia tech free of guns? No.

      Reply
    • Declan
      I was referring to your observation regarding people wishing for the breakdown of society.
      You can speak openly about such things in the US, but this is Ireland and it’s really dodgy ground.
      Of course, the US constitution protects the right to free speech, but we do not have that protection here, unfortunately.

      Reply
    • Virginia tech was a gun free Zoe and Marine bas was not mass killing. Two victims plus the perpetrator who shot himself.

      Reply
    • Dom, Virginia tech has armed police. I was talking about the mass shooting at another army base.
      You are talking about everyone going around armed. College students teachers and everyone else. That’s ludicrous. I am a mail man over here, do you expect me to carry a weapon while I deliver the mail?
      We could go around in circles talking about this and get nowhere and I have no wish to do so.
      I stand by my original comment about working in between 2 dumb individuals who go on and on about guns.

      Reply
    • Declan, gun free zone does not mean ‘no armed guards’ it means concealed carry licenses being null and void. You should really put more effort into learning about the subject you care about. There were cases in other Unis where students and professors used their personal guns to overcome the attackers. Unfortunately in Virginia tech everyone were sitting ducks.

      Reply
    • YES Declan army bases are usually gun free zones.Belive it or not.You dont have troops wandering around with loaded firearms at any given moment.The only time troops are armed is either sentry duty and for a specific threat,on a firing range conducting live fire drill,or a mobilisation for some grave threat.

      For your other point how armed police officers get killed while armed.Its called complacency and routine.
      the routine traffic stop situation has killed more LEOS than anything else.you could ask Gerry Mac Cabe or that other Garda in Louth about routine killing you in Ireland,but they died because of it.
      As for your other stupid assertion of being a mailman and not being armed,last I heard the USPS had issued MACE for dog attacks???And as you say you work between two idiots who talk about pro gun ownership.Why dont you put in for a transfer and move if it is so bothersome for you??Or are you afraid they will “go postal” on you???LMAO

      Reply
  • Not all Americans own guns or are interested in owning guns. The gun culture does not permeate to all American households. This is an incredibly diverse country and it is next to impossible to paint all Americans with the same brush. I am American, and no one in my family or any of my close friends own guns. I do not believe that teachers should be armed under any circumstances. I am furious that the assault weapon ban will not make it to the Senate floor. I have children, and want the best for them and for my country. Although their are some absolute knuckle dragging morons in this country, it is far from all or even most of us.

    Reply
  • Many Americans love guns more than they love the lives of others. Some American gun lovers are alienated from society and some of these American gun loving alienated Americans have the potential to commit multiple murders using powerful and automatic weapons.

    Of course there are massive practical challengingly in introducing effective gun controls in the USA but even that practical challenge does not arise when there appears to be a large majority in favour of weapons designed to kill human beings.

    When law abiding citizens perceive the danger to their lives as so great that arming themselves with guns in self defence is perceived as a compelling need, there can be no effective reform.

    Of course such weaponry is unnecessary and carries inherent dangers to human life but attempting tp reason with a gun loving extremist is futile.

    Reply
  • The NRA mantra has always been – Guns don’t shoot people, people do. But is damn hard to shoot someone WITHOUT a gun. In Europe we just do not have the culture and history of guns that exists in the US for hundreds of years. So difficult for us to understand their position. After Newtown – inexplicable. Nil desperandum – NOT!

    Reply
  • Wake up and smell the coffee….. The USA is a land of extremes, and big divisions…. They need to … Dare I say have to curb assault rifle gun ownership. ” Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it; however, most countries similar to the United States have a more secure social network. Higher gun-related death rates can be found in developing countries and countries with political instability.However, developed countries with strict gun laws have essentially eliminated gun violence.”. ….. For once I was totally behind Piers Morgan throughout the debates on CNN ….. Arms are the biggest business in the USA and all the protection is about keeping that business going. I’d rather live in Canada or numerous other countries before there. Sad part is most gun deaths in the usa are suicides, there are many ways to do that, but trying with a gun doesn’t give you much change while you are mentally ( temporally ) vulnerable.
    More US soldiers have killed themselves when back home than all killed in iraq and Afghanistan, America wake up… The coffee is brewing, or maybe you should try camomile tea…

    Reply
    • They already do.Its called the National FirearmsAct of 1932,which regulates the sale and possesion of aull auto assault rifles.
      Whats a secure social network?? Facebook with PGP???

      Developed countries have no guncrime…Oh My !! guess that rules out Ireland then??Maybe like Japan,that has plenty of guns in criminal hands,and like Ireland plenty of knifings and swordings instead.lets not forget 23 kids were hacked to death with a machete in a school in China the day Sandy Hook happened too.But as they werent shot it isnt as important no doubt…
      I guess that loudmouth Piers Morgan will be moving out now of the US as he shrilly announced that he would leave if this gun grab failed..Trouble is who will want that British buffoon???
      Please do live in Canada or wherever.America has enough stupidity without having to import more.

      PTSD is a big problem,however I’d put that down to an uncaring US govt,military forces,society, and crappy Vet administration.This has been a problem since Vietnam.Nothing to do with the availability of guns..As a point how many Vets have been involved in shootings??NONE!! Problem is fukwitted teens on legalised drugs sold by THE biggest industry in the USA,the pharma industry selling this stuff as a cure all for puberty problems or as chemical straight jackets.Every shooting perperator since Huberty in San Diego in 1984 has had mental problems or tried to access mental help in some shape or form.
      Nothing wrong with the coffee,its what socialist gun grabbers are putting in it is the big problem.

      Reply

Add New Comment