I'm looking at the legal precedent it sets.  If they can ban one firearm related item, they can ban more and more and more.  Why make it easy for them to do so if you don't have to?  Better to be safe than sorry.  Instead of banning any guns they should make them more available and easier to carry openly.  That way when some idiot tries what Lanz did, somebody will be nearby with a gun to take him down before the body count gets higher.

We need a like button.  Talk about bans and more government control is not the answer.  Donnie is absolutely right.  We need to be talking about how to train and arm more people so they re in a position to at least lessen the horror of attacks like this in the future.You know what the military term for a "gun-free zone" is?  Target rich environment.

I was talking about this at work today and I think principals and teachers should be deputized by federal marshals to openly carry sidearms or have access to them when needed.  They would of course receive the necessary training on use of the firearms and take down procedures including negotiating tactics.  Gun free zones are magnets for suicidal maniacs.

First, from what I understand about the CT shooting, the principal confronted the gunman (in the hallway?) and then shot her, and I think after this went into the classroom to kill the children.  If the shooting was totally unexpected, it would not have helped if her gun was locked away in her office somewhere, or even at the bottom of her purse.Second, requiring teachers and/or principals to openly carry sidearms or have access to them when needed changes their job description, something which I think would be highly difficult to realize.  If the principal is a 75 year old granny, is she honestly going to be trained in "take down procedures" and the like?  No, that is not going to happen.  These are administrators we're talking about.  Far more likely is that the school would hire outside security for the school.  This is, in fact, already done in many schools.  I just don't think that people would have expected the need for armed security at an elementary school, especially one in a quiet community.If teachers/principals were required to carry or have access to something, it would more likely be something non-lethal, such as tasers.  The shooting in CT was an anomaly, and I don't think more liberal gun laws would have prevented it from happening.  There are always going to be places where people are unprotected and vulnerable.  If not in a school, then in a nursing home, or a church, or some other similar place. 

The Second Amendment was put in place for the People in case they needed to resist a tyrannical government period.  Owning personal firearms thus is implied by this alone.

I don't think this issues is comparable to abortion since owning guns is not an absolute right according to the natural law or divine law.  I also don't think the right implied is as crystal clear as one might otherwise think.  The wording of the Second Amendment:"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."Now, according to this statement, what exactly are "arms"?  Did they include rifles?  Pistols?  Canons or other heavy artillery?  And is the right to "bear arms" contingent on their use as part of the "well regulated militia"?  I don't think the issue is entirely clear *based on the wording alone*, which is why the courts have had to weigh in on them and interpret them.Oh, and if the right to "bear arms" is inviolate, we really shouldn't be preventing incarcerated individuals from possessing them.  Of course, that would be insane.

When we lived in Playa de Rey, a beach community in the L.A. basin, the bus route was altered. Instead of delivering people directly to the beach, the bottom of our hill became the end of the route. Rapes and violent burglaries and assaults, which never existed before, came and increased. The bus would drop off groups of types who obviously did not mean well, and when they walked to the beach, they obviously scoped each home as they passed. At a community meeting, the police told us they were undermanned, with only 8 patrol cars covering an area from Venice to El Segunda from the beach to 5 miles in land and dealing mostly with more violence in less affluent areas. They told us to arm ourselves, and if we shot anyone on our property, drag them inside.After that I purchased an AR-15 and handguns, and we kept our flood lights on throughout the night. Occasionally during the day, I would sit by the upstairs living room window "cleaning" my weapon whe gangs walked by.I am solidly for no ban on semi- and automatic, and hand weapons. Given one cannot wear body armor 24/7 unless one is a total fruitcake, I still stand by my original comment."Slippery Slope" is a specious argument because all laws can be said to lead there. It is no different than someone asking "but what if ..." to stop an effort to build a wall on our border or get tougher with criminals.I wish we could go back to the days when looters could be shot on sight, but the mantra that began in the 1960s that human rights were more valuable than property rights is equally specious, for your property is your human right.Cross my threshhold unbidden and you die.

When we lived in Playa de Rey, a beach community in the L.A. basin, the bus route was altered. Instead of delivering people directly to the beach, the bottom of our hill became the end of the route. Rapes and violent burglaries and assaults, which never existed before, came and increased. The bus would drop off groups of types who obviously did not mean well, and when they walked to the beach, they obviously scoped each home as they passed. At a community meeting, the police told us they were undermanned, with only 8 patrol cars covering an area from Venice to El Segunda from the beach to 5 miles in land and dealing mostly with more violence in less affluent areas. They told us to arm ourselves, and if we shot anyone on our property, drag them inside.After that I purchased an AR-15 and handguns, and we kept our flood lights on throughout the night. Occasionally during the day, I would sit by the upstairs living room window "cleaning" my weapon whe gangs walked by.I am solidly for no ban on semi- and automatic, and hand weapons. Given one cannot wear body armor 24/7 unless one is a total fruitcake, I still stand by my original comment."Slippery Slope" is a specious argument because all laws can be said to lead there. It is no different than someone asking "but what if ..." to stop an effort to build a wall on our border or get tougher with criminals.I wish we could go back to the days when looters could be shot on sight, but the mantra that began in the 1960s that human rights were more valuable than property rights is equally specious, for your property is your human right.Cross my threshhold unbidden and you die.

Hear hear!  One reason I can't wait to get back to the states is I can have my guns back.  You guys have no idea the hoops you have to jump through to get a firearm over here.  I might even be right out because as a Combat vet I am presumed to be mentally unstable because I have actually killed people and did not seek mental treatment afterwards.  Hah! how funny is that.