They need to strengthen background checks and unify the system. NO MORE Gun show loophole!!! If you have any violent episode requiring police action that should red flag. Domestic violence is a red flag. Work place violence a red flag. Not that you can't ever get a gun but they should suspend that right for a period of time. No gun purchase and if you own guns they should be surrendered for the period of time.

For the criminal element they should increase penalties for possession of illegal guns. Lastly we need to increase during for mental health and make it so that you can't have guns in a home of someone with mental illness and violent tendencies. We're the only advanced county with this problem so we need to take strong action.

Vmart wrote:I'm not for guns but if the other kids were packing they could easily take out the shooter. I just don't get it has USA lost it marbles? I know the NRA would love to get back to the Wild Wild west. How does one call someone an idiot for having an opinion. LeBron is right there needs to be a ban on guns.

We had 5-7 year olds get shot and that did nothing to the U.S. I get that NRA is a powerful lobbyists and has the government in the palm of their hands. One thing about USA is you will never feel completely safe. A part of the reason is that we are a melting pot and that in itself makes for people who are wary of each other. No one shares history and that leads to a unsafe feeling that most get and that is the reasoning behind gun ownership. There is a total lack of trust and that is basically the result of being a melting pot.

My father is a retired police Lieutenant and my uncle was the highest ranking African American in the NY Police dept. My father was in the Vietnam War, Grandfather in WWII, his brothers where in WWI and my Great, Great Grandfather was in the Civil War. That's who should have guns and when assault rifles should be used.

This 2nd Amendment BS is being used by gun manufacturers who just wanna make money and conspiracy nuts and gun fanatics to allow them to own all the guns they want for some phone you coming war against the US government. Also racists who believe in a coming race war. Basically a bunch of crazy and violent people keep us from enacting gun control laws that would keep us safer.

yellowboy90 wrote:What are the statistics between the US and UK regarding gun violence? Don't they have strict gun laws? How is that working for them and would that be something the US could implement that would help.

In Australia, Britain and Canada, mass killings have had a mobilizing effect and resulted in changes to laws and regulations.

The turning point in Australia was in April 1996 when a man armed with semiautomatic weapons killed 35 people and wounded 23 in Port Arthur, Tasmania.

The national outcry that followed led to the rapid introduction of tight restrictions on firearms, including a ban on almost all automatic and semiautomatic rifles, as well as shotguns.

John Howard, who had only recently become prime minister when the legislation was enacted, said the process was not easy.

each of Australia’s states and territories to enact their own laws, called for an ambitious gun-buyback program that led to the recovery and destruction of more than 600,000 weapons, and imposed a one-time tax on all Australians.

Some of Mr. Howard’s center-right coalition supporters, including rural residents who had long owned guns, resented the fact that they had to give up their weapons because of the criminal behavior of others, Mr. Howard wrote in 2013 in The New York Times.

But Australia also had fewer barriers than the United States to enacting gun control: There is no constitutional right to bear arms, and there are no pro-gun lobbying groups with the influence of the National Rifle Association.

“In the end, we won the battle to change gun laws because there was majority support across Australia for banning certain weapons,” he wrote, adding, “Few Australians would deny that their country is safer today as a consequence of gun control.”

In 1987, a gunman in the southern English town of Hungerford killed 16 people, including his mother and a police officer, leading to the introduction of tough laws in Britain requiring owners of shotguns to register their weapons and prohibiting semiautomatic weapons.

Nearly a decade later, after 16 small children and a teacher were shot and killed during three minutes of horror in the Scottish town of Dunblane in 1996, the British government banned the private ownership of automatic weapons and prohibited the private ownership of handguns in Britain’s mainland.

Although the results have been mixed, some criminologists contend that tougher rules regarding gun registration, even for owning a hunting rifle, have helped circumscribe gun crime.

Tough restrictions on handguns and automatic weapons in Canada date to the 1930s. But the rules were expanded to include rifles and shotguns in the aftermath of a rampage in 1989, when an unemployed and embittered 25-year-old armed with a semiautomatic hunting rifle stormed an engineering school in Montreal.

Shouting “I hate feminists,” he separated the women from the men and killed 14 female students before turning the gun on himself.

After that shooting, rifles and other long guns had to be registered like handguns and a majority of semiautomatic weapons. Gun owners were also required to obtain a license, and ammunition sales were controlled.

The long gun registry was unpopular in rural and northern areas. Over the objections of police forces and some provinces, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who is now seeking re-election, abolished that law in 2012, although ownership of any kind of gun still requires a license.http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/americas/australia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html?referer=http://r.search.yahoo.com/RV=1/RE=1443948974/RB=/RO=8/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nytimes.com%2f2015%2f10%2f03%2fworld%2famericas%2faustralia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html/RS=%5EADA1XEITtxQe5Q54xv_B.wjtuCLpyY-

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:What are the statistics between the US and UK regarding gun violence? Don't they have strict gun laws? How is that working for them and would that be something the US could implement that would help.

Australia had a similar problem with mass shootings and they solved their problems with strict laws so it can be done.

In Australia, Britain and Canada, mass killings have had a mobilizing effect and resulted in changes to laws and regulations.

The turning point in Australia was in April 1996 when a man armed with semiautomatic weapons killed 35 people and wounded 23 in Port Arthur, Tasmania.

The national outcry that followed led to the rapid introduction of tight restrictions on firearms, including a ban on almost all automatic and semiautomatic rifles, as well as shotguns.

John Howard, who had only recently become prime minister when the legislation was enacted, said the process was not easy.

each of Australia’s states and territories to enact their own laws, called for an ambitious gun-buyback program that led to the recovery and destruction of more than 600,000 weapons, and imposed a one-time tax on all Australians.

Some of Mr. Howard’s center-right coalition supporters, including rural residents who had long owned guns, resented the fact that they had to give up their weapons because of the criminal behavior of others, Mr. Howard wrote in 2013 in The New York Times.

But Australia also had fewer barriers than the United States to enacting gun control: There is no constitutional right to bear arms, and there are no pro-gun lobbying groups with the influence of the National Rifle Association.

“In the end, we won the battle to change gun laws because there was majority support across Australia for banning certain weapons,” he wrote, adding, “Few Australians would deny that their country is safer today as a consequence of gun control.”

In 1987, a gunman in the southern English town of Hungerford killed 16 people, including his mother and a police officer, leading to the introduction of tough laws in Britain requiring owners of shotguns to register their weapons and prohibiting semiautomatic weapons.

Nearly a decade later, after 16 small children and a teacher were shot and killed during three minutes of horror in the Scottish town of Dunblane in 1996, the British government banned the private ownership of automatic weapons and prohibited the private ownership of handguns in Britain’s mainland.

Although the results have been mixed, some criminologists contend that tougher rules regarding gun registration, even for owning a hunting rifle, have helped circumscribe gun crime.

Tough restrictions on handguns and automatic weapons in Canada date to the 1930s. But the rules were expanded to include rifles and shotguns in the aftermath of a rampage in 1989, when an unemployed and embittered 25-year-old armed with a semiautomatic hunting rifle stormed an engineering school in Montreal.

Shouting “I hate feminists,” he separated the women from the men and killed 14 female students before turning the gun on himself.

After that shooting, rifles and other long guns had to be registered like handguns and a majority of semiautomatic weapons. Gun owners were also required to obtain a license, and ammunition sales were controlled.

The long gun registry was unpopular in rural and northern areas. Over the objections of police forces and some provinces, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who is now seeking re-election, abolished that law in 2012, although ownership of any kind of gun still requires a license.http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/americas/australia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html?referer=http://r.search.yahoo.com/RV=1/RE=1443948974/RB=/RO=8/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nytimes.com%2f2015%2f10%2f03%2fworld%2famericas%2faustralia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html/RS=%5EADA1XEITtxQe5Q54xv_B.wjtuCLpyY-

All of this make sense but it will not stop killers from getting guns from black market. As legal guns will be harder to get the black market will explode.
This issue cannot be solved only with gun control. Mental health should not be a taboo and if someone is sick he/she should get more attention not less.

arkrud wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:What are the statistics between the US and UK regarding gun violence? Don't they have strict gun laws? How is that working for them and would that be something the US could implement that would help.

Australia had a similar problem with mass shootings and they solved their problems with strict laws so it can be done.

In Australia, Britain and Canada, mass killings have had a mobilizing effect and resulted in changes to laws and regulations.

The turning point in Australia was in April 1996 when a man armed with semiautomatic weapons killed 35 people and wounded 23 in Port Arthur, Tasmania.

The national outcry that followed led to the rapid introduction of tight restrictions on firearms, including a ban on almost all automatic and semiautomatic rifles, as well as shotguns.

John Howard, who had only recently become prime minister when the legislation was enacted, said the process was not easy.

each of Australia’s states and territories to enact their own laws, called for an ambitious gun-buyback program that led to the recovery and destruction of more than 600,000 weapons, and imposed a one-time tax on all Australians.

Some of Mr. Howard’s center-right coalition supporters, including rural residents who had long owned guns, resented the fact that they had to give up their weapons because of the criminal behavior of others, Mr. Howard wrote in 2013 in The New York Times.

But Australia also had fewer barriers than the United States to enacting gun control: There is no constitutional right to bear arms, and there are no pro-gun lobbying groups with the influence of the National Rifle Association.

“In the end, we won the battle to change gun laws because there was majority support across Australia for banning certain weapons,” he wrote, adding, “Few Australians would deny that their country is safer today as a consequence of gun control.”

In 1987, a gunman in the southern English town of Hungerford killed 16 people, including his mother and a police officer, leading to the introduction of tough laws in Britain requiring owners of shotguns to register their weapons and prohibiting semiautomatic weapons.

Nearly a decade later, after 16 small children and a teacher were shot and killed during three minutes of horror in the Scottish town of Dunblane in 1996, the British government banned the private ownership of automatic weapons and prohibited the private ownership of handguns in Britain’s mainland.

Although the results have been mixed, some criminologists contend that tougher rules regarding gun registration, even for owning a hunting rifle, have helped circumscribe gun crime.

Tough restrictions on handguns and automatic weapons in Canada date to the 1930s. But the rules were expanded to include rifles and shotguns in the aftermath of a rampage in 1989, when an unemployed and embittered 25-year-old armed with a semiautomatic hunting rifle stormed an engineering school in Montreal.

Shouting “I hate feminists,” he separated the women from the men and killed 14 female students before turning the gun on himself.

After that shooting, rifles and other long guns had to be registered like handguns and a majority of semiautomatic weapons. Gun owners were also required to obtain a license, and ammunition sales were controlled.

The long gun registry was unpopular in rural and northern areas. Over the objections of police forces and some provinces, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who is now seeking re-election, abolished that law in 2012, although ownership of any kind of gun still requires a license.http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/americas/australia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html?referer=http://r.search.yahoo.com/RV=1/RE=1443948974/RB=/RO=8/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nytimes.com%2f2015%2f10%2f03%2fworld%2famericas%2faustralia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html/RS=%5EADA1XEITtxQe5Q54xv_B.wjtuCLpyY-

All of this make sense but it will not stop killers from getting guns from black market. As legal guns will be harder to get the black market will explode.
This issue cannot be solved only with gun control. Mental health should not be a taboo and if someone is sick he/she should get more attention not less.

I agree mental health and also revoking gun ownership for domestic abusers and those who have violent episodes at work or home. Not everyone should have a gun and in some situations it should be law that guns be removed from the home if it's unsafe.

Easy way to follow the Constitution and regulate firearms...

All gun owners must be part of a national militia. They would be trained and evaluated, since not everyone could be part of a "well regulated militia."

Unfortunately, we have a Supreme Court, which despite claims that it believes in "Original Intent," sees the 2nd Amendment as:

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."

arkrud wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:What are the statistics between the US and UK regarding gun violence? Don't they have strict gun laws? How is that working for them and would that be something the US could implement that would help.

Australia had a similar problem with mass shootings and they solved their problems with strict laws so it can be done.

In Australia, Britain and Canada, mass killings have had a mobilizing effect and resulted in changes to laws and regulations.

The turning point in Australia was in April 1996 when a man armed with semiautomatic weapons killed 35 people and wounded 23 in Port Arthur, Tasmania.

The national outcry that followed led to the rapid introduction of tight restrictions on firearms, including a ban on almost all automatic and semiautomatic rifles, as well as shotguns.

John Howard, who had only recently become prime minister when the legislation was enacted, said the process was not easy.

each of Australia’s states and territories to enact their own laws, called for an ambitious gun-buyback program that led to the recovery and destruction of more than 600,000 weapons, and imposed a one-time tax on all Australians.

Some of Mr. Howard’s center-right coalition supporters, including rural residents who had long owned guns, resented the fact that they had to give up their weapons because of the criminal behavior of others, Mr. Howard wrote in 2013 in The New York Times.

But Australia also had fewer barriers than the United States to enacting gun control: There is no constitutional right to bear arms, and there are no pro-gun lobbying groups with the influence of the National Rifle Association.

“In the end, we won the battle to change gun laws because there was majority support across Australia for banning certain weapons,” he wrote, adding, “Few Australians would deny that their country is safer today as a consequence of gun control.”

In 1987, a gunman in the southern English town of Hungerford killed 16 people, including his mother and a police officer, leading to the introduction of tough laws in Britain requiring owners of shotguns to register their weapons and prohibiting semiautomatic weapons.

Nearly a decade later, after 16 small children and a teacher were shot and killed during three minutes of horror in the Scottish town of Dunblane in 1996, the British government banned the private ownership of automatic weapons and prohibited the private ownership of handguns in Britain’s mainland.

Although the results have been mixed, some criminologists contend that tougher rules regarding gun registration, even for owning a hunting rifle, have helped circumscribe gun crime.

Tough restrictions on handguns and automatic weapons in Canada date to the 1930s. But the rules were expanded to include rifles and shotguns in the aftermath of a rampage in 1989, when an unemployed and embittered 25-year-old armed with a semiautomatic hunting rifle stormed an engineering school in Montreal.

Shouting “I hate feminists,” he separated the women from the men and killed 14 female students before turning the gun on himself.

After that shooting, rifles and other long guns had to be registered like handguns and a majority of semiautomatic weapons. Gun owners were also required to obtain a license, and ammunition sales were controlled.

The long gun registry was unpopular in rural and northern areas. Over the objections of police forces and some provinces, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who is now seeking re-election, abolished that law in 2012, although ownership of any kind of gun still requires a license.http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/americas/australia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html?referer=http://r.search.yahoo.com/RV=1/RE=1443948974/RB=/RO=8/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nytimes.com%2f2015%2f10%2f03%2fworld%2famericas%2faustralia-britain-canada-us-gun-legislation.html/RS=%5EADA1XEITtxQe5Q54xv_B.wjtuCLpyY-

All of this make sense but it will not stop killers from getting guns from black market. As legal guns will be harder to get the black market will explode.
This issue cannot be solved only with gun control. Mental health should not be a taboo and if someone is sick he/she should get more attention not less.

This black market thing is a myth. Austrailia had a mass shooting and put in place harsh gun laws. They have not had another mass shooting since. It has been over 20 years since they implemented the laws. Will it work overnight? No, but there is no way you can tell me that less guns is not better. You will never get rid of crazy people. You can always get rid of the tools those crazy people use to kill others so easily.