Well I'm sorry guys, I guess my memory is failing me. I searched for gun laws in Berwyn but the best I could come up with was some abiguity on being allowed to own a gun in town.

Steven I grew up in Park Forest. I live in Georgia now. I remember now knowing that Kennesaw had a requirement for gun ownership. Too bad that Berwyn has a lot of crime these days. In reading I found out that in the beginning they were a pretty affluent community.

 

That's pretty unlikely considering the last major gun legislation was the assult weapons ban (now expired). It outlawed guns based on how "scarey" they looked. Banning thing like threaded barrel, bayonet mounts, pistol grips, and folding stocks have very little to with gun violence.
The ban did however double the price of pre ban grandfathered items. Guessing now is the time to buy a few AKs.

 

We recently had a mall shooting in Portland Oregon. Only two people were killed and one wounded before the wacko shot himself. I just read a report that it was confrontation with a private citizen who had a concealed carry permit that led the nut case to shoot himself. I'd like to look for other articles that support this story before saying for sure this happened, but Oregon does has a very liberal concealed carry permit system. So there's a lot of people who do legally carry. If anyone wants to read this story here's the link:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/20...uns-save-lives

 

 

Here's a link to the local Portland news story about it, John.

Looks legit.
The guy really looks a bit shellshocked, and I don't blame him.
He probably helped to save a lot of lives (along with the good Lord jamming the shooter's weapon ).

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-ma...183593571.html

- Eric

 

I'm not singling you out Steven, just responding in concept. The alternative to the FIRST draw wins, is the ONLY draw wins. If the crazy guy is the only one with a gun, then the crazy guy gets to have his way. That's what happened in Connecticut, and that's what happens here in Illinois.

I don't want ANYBODY to draw. Ever. But since it's inevitable that at some point another crazy guy is going to get a gun, I want the person or people he's attacking to have the option to defend themselves.

Again, not pointing at you Steven. Just my opinion.

 

From my cold dead hands.

On that note, are members here allowed to post gun ads?

 

Gee, Oldzy, for talk like that, won't the OPP come to your house, break in your door, pummel you with a rolled up copy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and drag you off for a long stay by the lake in Kingston?



- Eric

 

Yeah the Ontario Political Police are pretty scary. Hence the reason I am selling the last of my guns. However, they will have to pry the ol .577 Snider from my hands as I am keeping that one.

And of course my Red Ryder (official) carbine action 200-shot range model air rifle - almost forgot that one.

 

If you have a DPMS LRT SASS I am willing to pay retail price + shipping.

 

that's a-ok with me, I see your point as well, and appreciate it. That's why I question it. I am very much for more control just don't know where the line should be. I am a very laid back person until you tick me off, I for one would hope I could control myself but I also never want to be the one who mistakenly hurts a neighbor or has someone else grab my gun and hurts/kills someone else with it. I'd never forgive myself.

 

I think this is an important point of divergence of the debate that is seldom, if ever, discussed.

I believe that a lot of those more in favor of additional gun controls worry about their own behavior, while those on the other side are confident about theirs.

Of course, people's own assessments of their own behaviors in situations they have never encountered may be wildly inaccurate, but I believe that this is the way each group, in general, sees things at the outset, and it's reflected in the policies that each side advocates.

- Eric

 

Bah... you want a Colt LE6920 or LMT 10.5/14.5/16.

Can only ship to Canada unfortunately with all the laws and stuff. It is a mint factory Mossberg 590 12GA w/ 14" bbl, speedfeed stock. Asking price is $1100 though, but that is b/c they are no longer exportable from the US to Canada. I paid $799 at the time (back in 2002).

http://oldz442.com/images/misc/guns/fs/mossberg/590/

 

Nice gun.

How could you possibly sell that?

- Eric

 

Here's a good take on the recent gun problems, etc.

http://market-ticker.org/

 

$ No choice. Bank froze my acct. Need to get out of the red zone if possible. Also selling my frame. Oh well... these things happen. Can always start up again when things pick up.

 

Oh crap. One of my worst fears.

I hope it all gets straightened out soon.

At least you stand to gain from this sale.

- Eric

 

Nah, I want a .308 AR...I've used Colt M4's in the military and while they are good, I am looking for a more comfortable hunting rifle that will put down 300+ lbs hogs without much effort. I love the AR platform but have always felt the .223 is a bit light for hunting any more than a small white tail.

No matter, since that post I have contracted a dealer here locally that is going to "on demand" order a RRA LAR-8 Predator HP

I've got a Mossberg 500 Defender, I love it...don't need a 590 for the extra price, mine holds the same 8+1 as the 590 And for sitting in the closet for that ONE day where someone decides to break in my house, the 500 is perfect Good luck selling it!

 

Thank you for posting that, I enjoyed it very much. My only suggestion would be to post a link to the post instead of the main page. As posts are added that post will move down and be hard to find. To get the individual post link, click on the post title.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=215068

 

Yeah, you're right. I thought I was doing what you said. I'm lucky I got as far as I did!

 

post i replied to is gone. :/

 

Yeah, they do that sometimes...

 

What happened is horrendous. However, what I think is overlooked is that the shooter is a victim too. I don't defend what he did, but feel that he deserves sympathy too.


Like so many of the other people that have perpetrated these types of killings this was a mentally disturbed individual. On top of that it is intuitive and logical to assume he was ostracized by his school mates all through his life and worse probably relentlessly picked on and teased.


Sorry, but we reap what we sow. We (as a nation) do not have a comprehensive mental health guideline or awareness program to help fight this disease before it becomes lethal. In schools the anti-bulling rules are essentially ignored - except when a real problem occurs - like a fight.
Parents (all parents) share a good portion of blame for not educating their kids about bullying others.


There is only so much a mistreated person, much less one with mental instability, can take before some awful happens to them and with them perhaps others. In high school I remember a boy (a smart kid too) we teased relentlessly. One day he became violent in class. Throwing chairs and books -lucky for us. We never saw him again. However, while that was 40 years ago I remember it well and still feel a twinge of guilt though I was hardly one of the more egregious tormentors.



I feel for those 20 kids and their parents as well as the 6 adults, but blaming Lanza or guns is a futile way to express frustration and anger. The title of this thread is "evil does exist". I am not sure that was meant to imply Lanza is evil or that some other entity bears that title. However, it does exist - it exists because of all of us. Lanza was not evil he was sick and he was tormented. As I said the real evil is the lack of attention and compassion we as a society made available this boy/man. It is not the guns, the video games or anything else. Also, you cannot lock the evil out. Making schools into forts with police stationed there is not a good environment and is actually practically useless during these type events. Did you know that Columbine HS had a SRO (student resource officer), a cop, in the school at the time of the shootings. He fired no shots and actually ran from the school.


The President and legislators eager to gain political capital will attempt to push legislation that bans certain products that "look" like military guns and will tout that as a wonderful accomplishment, but it means virtually nothing. There are over 1M AR-15s in the USA, but the AR-15 is not the only semi-auto rifle that accepts a magazine - and those other non-military "looking" guns will continue to be legal. It should be noted that the civilian AR-15 is not in any way other then appearance a military type weapon. The entire firing mechanism is different as are other parts that make it non-military grade (including the ability to actually work with military grade ammunition). Note that none of these recent shooters modified their rifle to auto.


So - while it may be hard I think we should all express some sympathy for this Lanza guy too. Additionally, we all bear some responsibility for what happened. If you want to help stop this kind of thing in the future then:
-write your legislator about mental health programs for schools
-Do the same with your school boards
-Ask your kids if they are bullied or know of someone bullied and report it
-Explain to your kids that if they are the bully how evil that is

 

If I recall correctly, the officer was outside and the 2 shooters had came in a different way and had secured the doors with chain and padlocks so no one could come in or get out. The big stink that I remember was the SWAT teams showed up in full body armor and stood around waiting outside until the shooting stopped while the officer in charge evaluated the situation.

 

I am sure there are variations on what really happened, there always seem to be when it comes to details. The point is however, that either way the SRO did not help.

 

Hmmm...a pretty unrealistic view of gun control by the media. Written by people who have probably never seen a real gun. Imagine trying to confiscate every now legal gun in the US that would become illegal. They might have done that in australia, but they sold over 200,000 AR 15s last year. Probably double that next year.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-1...xample/4431262

 

I agree an extremely simplistic viewpoint. However, that is what people want - a simple answer. I also find it hard to believe that simply removing semi-auto guns can dramatically reduce mass shootings. If there was a decline it had to be coupled with some other initiatives....e.g. a program to help identify and report people who give indications of doing such a crime.

You are quite correct also when you say these articles are written by people who have never seen or handled a real gun. I can recall countless times when people confuse semi-auto with auto (or as they like to say "machine gun"). Recently there have been a spate of articles on requiring guns to have bio-metric safety features - but while that technology does exist it is extremely expensive and has no interest from the industry or gun owners. Besides from what I understand the technology is still somewhat unreliable and can be circumvented without too much effort.

 

This is definitely NOT something that I can relate to. I was bullied as a kid. I don't shoot people. I'd go so far as to say bullying made me a stronger person. I believe an adult who goes and mercilessly murders 20 little kids and 6 adults is evil. I believe that is the definition of evil. I think a big part of our problem is trying to sympathize with people and situations that don't merit sympathy. Life is rough, it doesn't justify evil actions. This is just my opinion, and you are of course entitled to yours, but I disagree wholeheartedly.

 

First off, horrible for everyone involved. Living in Canada, we have so far mostly avoided these type of shoot em ups. But we have them too, maybe our smaller population is why we have less of them. I know buying a gun here is more difficult, but many rural people have MANY high powered rifles, have for years. I have never bothered to buy a gun, a pain to do it. But a nut could find someone to get a gun, illegally. You can make it hard to buy a gun legally but there is always the illegal. Guns are big business, too much money to be made. The solution will not be easy. Supposedly one of the victim's father moved his family from Winnipeg, where he taught music. He was originally from Conneticut. He probably thought that they would be safer there than the murder capital of Canada. What the statistics don't tell is that most are Natives killing Natives. Another unfortunate situation in Canada.

 

Montreal... Ecole Polytechnique in 1989 and Dawson college in 2006 IIRC. Then of course there is Jane/Finch and Toronto in general. Other than that, we are pretty quiet here. And there are tons of guns here eh.

 

I won't go so far as to sympathize with this guy, especially since I know nothing about him, but I do agree on the mental health and bullying aspects of this situation.

I certainly got "the treatment" when I was in Junior High (almost forty years ago), and I remember sitting there, thinking about going to school with a gun and shooting everyone there, but, of course, I didn't do it, though I could have found a way to scrounge up a few guns had I really wanted to (the family didn't keep them in easy reach).

Instead, I had to get my revenge the way that countless generations did before me:
I got good grades, went on to higher schools, and wound up with professional degrees and a good career.
The other thing I used to think about was hiring my former classmates to work for my large company, then personally firing them and laughing as they begged for their jobs.
If I'd gone into business and had a company, I might still do it if I got the chance now, too.

I would not go so far as to say that poor treatment made me a better person (though it might have), but, as with the "Boy Named Sue," "I think I'm gonna name him... Bill or George - Anything but Sue!" I would not promote it as a way to make kids lives better.

Since the most damaging (to the person and to the family - not to other people in a violent way) psychiatric illness in clearly schizophrenia, and since this disease tends to manifest itself around 18 years of age, there have been a number of experimental programs in recent years designed to see if it was possible to identify these kids early and get them treatment before they began to "fall apart." As far as I know, none of them have had spectacular amounts of success, but I believe that more of our hard-earned tax dollars should go to looking into these questions, for the good of us all.

Aside from this, I believe that, where possible, a number of teachers in every school should receive special training and be permitted (and expected) to carry concealed weapons. The powers that be could focus on ex-military and others with experience in the area (who didn't have an ex-Marine gym teacher or dean in school?), but it should be open to others as well. Teachers who participated would be expected not to reveal their status (kids don't need to know this), but would be there, in the building, should anything bad happen. I prefer this to the current habit of placing uniformed guards or officers in schools, as (aside from educational visits) I believe that schools are no place for cops, any more than police stations are any place for teachers. Kids should go to school and see their teachers, with their knowledge, as the ultimate authority figures, not Officer So-and-so, with his stick and his gun.

- Eric

 

I'm not promoting bullying, just that within reason, there is something to be said for letting kids learn how to fend for themselves with their classmates. Shielding them from every little problem prevents them from learning how to deal with difficult situations. I find it interesting that "bullying" was never at the forefront in the past, and yet, previous generations turned out just fine. Now suddenly it's become a big deal, and yet this realization arrives concurrently with other big societal problems. I wonder which is the cause and which is the effect.

 

I agree with that.

- Eric

 

This is going to be tough for all of us, lots of tough decisions. As for bullying, of course it wasn't in the forefront in the past, neither was smoking while pregnant, drinking while driving, hitting your children or priest molesting children (the priest who did it at my grade school conveniently was transferred to the high-school I went to - how sick is that?!). I was bullied as well, wouldn't wish it on anyone. I'm old enough now to look back and wonder was I an instigator, were kids always teasing me because I could handle it better than most - who knows, did it make me who I am today, of course a little bit, nurture and nature, it all matters.

I just think that it is too easy to kill too many with a gun especially a semi-automatic - period. I also don't see how we can expect people to be experts on guns, of course most won't be. I have shot many types of guns from little 22s to 50mm machine guns on the deck of a destroyer, yet I couldn't tell a lugar from a magnum. Doesn't mean me or the others don't have a rightful opinion on guns.

I think MDchanic really hit the point better than I could ever say, many people believe they know how to handle guns better than they do, those without them aren't sure about themselves - the real issue he brings up is neither of the groups really will ever know until they will be put in a position to have to make that decision - most don't have the training. That's what scares me, the novice who shoots and hits the wrong person, the expert who gets trigger happy or just goes off the deep end, the mother who trusts their child who has never shown any sign of violence, me shooting at an intruder only to find out it was my drunk neighbor thinking it was his house (no didn't happen but could!)

 

This is the point of debate that has been going on since about 1933.

What is the point at which it becomes "too easy to kill" versus, I suppose, "just-right-easy to kill."?

Some will say that any gun makes it "too easy."

The current US law says (for the most part) that full-auto, "non-small" arms, artillery, and explosives (such as land mines and hand grenades) make it "too easy."

This is a determination that a society must make.

So as not to get "political," I will not get into exactly where I think we should draw the line, but if a person can make a rational, objective, non-emotional argument about why we should stop at a given point on the continuum of destructive power, then that can contribute to a reasoned discussion.

- Eric

 

If there is a mass shooting with a bolt-action, all the antis and knee jerkers will want those banned as well. Kind of hard to legislate crazy.

 

I think this guy should not be allowed to work anywhere but McDonalds from here on out ! I mean really ? Just think what would happen if every cop ran from a shooting .

 

That's even worse ! I think there was some kind of failure in the process going on here . I mean it's obviously good to evaluate the situation , so there not running into harms way , but there are plenty of situations that they have had to take chances in the past . It's kind of their job .

 

x2

 

, and here I just thought about beating them up .


Now that's more like it .


I can agree to that .