Police Believe Sandy Hook Shooting Was An 'Emulation' Of Video Game Scenario

[SlayerRondo]

timmah said:

SlayerRondo said:

timmah said:

Criminals don't buy guns legally anyway, and the US has a terrible history in relation to bans in general. Just look at when we banned alcohol back in the day, and our current 'war on drugs', neither ban resulted in less access to the banned items for criminals, and both led to the proliferation of crime and violence. Banning guns in a country with massive shorelines and easy smuggling paths at the borders would be disasterous, as criminals would still have easy access to illegal guns, while normal (law abiding) citizens would no longer have the ability to defend themselves.

People don't buy child porn legally either the point is that it make's it harder to get ahold of a gun when there illegal especially when the person is mentally inept like the Sandy Hook shooter. 

And I'll agree that America is a more dangeous nation than Australia and therefore people need gun's to defend themselve's but Assault rifle's are exessive and only used to kill large group's of people or in a warzone. Using one in a school or a residential neighbourhood would be far more dangerous than a form of protection.

And the attempt to restrict video game's more would be far less sucessfull than restricting gun's as the internet would just fuel piracy. 

I also agree that the war on drugs is only adding to the allure of drugs, wasting billion's of dollars and send's people to jail for victimless crimes.

While banning assault rifles sounds warm and fuzzy, the fact is it will do literally nothing to prevent or even impede violence. A very, very small percentage of violence in the US is carried out with these types of weapons, and the fact is that multiple handguns with smaller clips (which the shooter also had on his person) could be just as easily used to carry out the exact same level of carnage and are much easier to conceal. This type of ban is really just to make people feel better inside, as it has no measurable effect on violence.

Also, Adam Lanza was not mentally inept at all, he had a severe case of Asbergers and a personality disorder, but was a very, very smart individual. He was certainly intelligent enough to figure out another way to carry out his evil intentions.

I certainly wouldn't advocate for restricting video games.

I'm not against sensible steps. Background checks should be more stringent, there should be tougher laws on the transfer of gun ownership, and people should be required to report stolen firearms. I think holding an owner responsible if he transfers ownership to a felon or failure to report a theft within a given period of time would also help. There are sensible things we can do that might actually help.

Please don't use term's like warm and fuzzy as though you can make the argument for banning/restricting firearm's seem to be based on emotion rather than logic.

It is well shown that nation's where their are a higher percentage of gun owner's have a higher rate of gun violence and when they regulate gun's in a signifigant way the rate's of gun homicide go down. And oddly enough the rate of knifing's and bombing's have not gone up in nation's like Australia where gun ban's have signifigantly reduced gun death's.

However i would agree to tale the steps you mentioned first to see the effect's it has as well as law's requiring people living with children or people with mental disabilities having to use storage equipment not accessable to them.