Has The Terrible Shooting In Tucson Finally Convinced Gun Enthusiasts That We Need To Have Gun Control In This Country?

[chadburne48]

And I am right with you, believe me. I have always been all for gun control. There are statistically more accidental deaths than there are justifiable deaths where an intruder breaks into one's home and the gun was used in self defense. Also, there are too many crazy people out there who are able to easily purchase a gun.Very good question!MD   MorningDew 36 months ago

[Jooseppi]

The gun makes it sensational, because that's the way the media likes it. How many fires are started by unsupervised children in this country every year. Thousands. Do you hear about that? No. It isn't about the gun, it's about stupid parents.   maggo 36 months ago

[Byford]

I'd like to see a paradigm shift, but I can't imagine how such a thing would happen. Certainly not in a single incident. There will likely be a few people whose opinions have swayed one way or the other over this, but it doesn't change the fundamental driver. Americans like to think of themselves as a self-reliant, independent people who don't depend on anybody else, especially the government. Even when the government is involved, they like it to be in a kind of stand-offish way, like the way we hand hungry people food stamps rather than food.The fondness for guns starts from the same place. Many don't want to cede the right to self-defense. It's exacerbated by culture and history: even if people were prepared to give up guns, the presence of so many guns in the country makes it such that only those with criminal intent would be armed.Things do shift in small ways, but there's no use looking for a paradigm shift. Certainly not in an incident which kills only a half-dozen people. It's shocking, but it only happens every few years, and the number of people is trivial compared to even something like deaths from slipping in the bathtub(341 people per year):http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm   PamPerdue 36 months ago http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm

[On]

Criminals are people too...   IndependentStevo 25 months ago http://youtu.be/ngsKzdKNAmo

[Ricki]

Just consider the Swiss. They do not have the laws but are safe. How do they manage?   Gary4books 36 months ago

[Treasach]

I did not hear that, wow, unreal.Thanks, Twilightdreamlover   MorningDew 36 months ago

[Adeben]

This is the cry every time there is a sad horrific gun crime,more gun control make them all illegal ,do you really think that some one who is going to commit such an act really cares if his gun or magazine is legal??And how is making Joe blow working guy,who enjoys hunting or shooting sports gun illegal going to stop this type of crime??I am a Canadian firearm enthusiast ,who enjoys the shooting sports,all my firearms are legal, we have very tough gun laws in this country and yet there is still gun violence.So please enlighten me as to how more gun control would have prevented this nut job,from doing this horrific crime,he just would have obtained the gun through the black market instead.Now in your favor,I see no need for high capacity mags either,here in Canada ,you can only have legally 10 round mags for semi automatic hand guns,and 5 for rifles,but know you can obtain high capacity ones very easily ,even though they have been illegal for years.So again with gun control,do you think someone about to commit a crime with a gun,gives a crap if it's legal or not??   Squeeky-changes-suck 36 months ago

[Hammond]

No. No incident is going to do that ever.Congress will be getting beefed up security from now on paid for by us.The AZ, legislature will debate some ideas about keeping nuts from buying guns and ammo and realize it's impossible to do.Politicians like Giffords will be less accessible in all likelihood as a result of one monster's acts. This is the real shame.   dougiedognabit 36 months ago

[Ander]

the problem is that we cannot agree on what "gun control" means.those who preach "gun control" typically mean no law abiding person is allowed to own a gun, unless they can prove they needed it yesterday.those who think if we enforced the laws that already exist, we'd have less trouble have a problem with that definition.   TheLightWorks 36 months ago

[Moor]

Having the right to bear arms means I can wear sleeveless shirts, right?MD;   MorningDew 36 months ago