A possible solution to school shootings?

Question

Following the Dunblane Massacre March 13, 1996 in which 18 were killed including the gunman at a Scottish primary school, under Tony Blair the UK passed The Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 which banned ALL handguns (excluding law enforcement). Since this ban, there has not been a school shooting in the UK, with the exception of some BB gun incidents. People are screaming for changes to prevent future incidents similar to the ones seen recently, would this be a step in the right direction especially since it has proven itself successful? Or will handgun enthusiast wait until one of their children is injured and say "man, maybe we should have banned handguns". What do ya think? Your argument better not be "it's to hard to ban all handguns", it was just done 10 years ago.

Remember, handguns, not ALL guns friends.

Answer 1

I understand what you are saying, but there is no way to ban all the handguns in our country. It was just done 10 years ago, but in the UK. There are way more guns here than there were there. There is no way to ban guns here for many reasons, mostly because there is no way to know where all handguns are.

There is absolutely no way to ban guns here. I think the best way to stop the shootings, would be to pass stricter gun laws. I do not think guns should be sold in pawn shops, on the Internet, or anywhere for that matter, except certain special stores. In order to buy a handgun, someone would have to go through a gun safety course and pass. Pass a mental exam and background check, that includes all and every thing on it. Example,Cho had been considered mentally unstable and been in a mental institution before and had stalking cases against him, it should have shown up on his record when background check was done. It should be at least a 2 week process to purchase a gun. That is my idea on gun control anyways. Maybe have a chip inserted in every gun that way it could be tracked.

Answer 2

Better campus security would be a step in the right direction better video surveillance comes to mind. Also when it comes to purchasing firearms instant electronic background checks don't work. You need time to do a complete search of the prospective buyers history.

Had things been done right the Virginia Tech shooting might not have happened because of the shooters prior history of mental instability.

In California we have a term for people like that, it's "5150" meaning someones been ordered by a judge to seek mental help. We also have "1814" which means a person has been deemed "unable to take care of themselves do to some sort of mental condition". A person who shows up under either statute wouldn't be allowed to pick up the weapon.

Bottom line there should be at least a 3 day waiting period for purchases of ALL firearms. This won't stop all gun crime but again it's a step in the right direction.

Answer 3

So why is it that England has had to arm the bobbies in the last few years? Could it be that criminals didn't turn in their handguns and, just like the NRA says, now only the criminals have guns and are preying on the completely unarmed citizenry?

Is there not more overall gun violence in England now than there was ten years ago?

Answer 4

Here are a couple of things to consider

(1) Disallow people form purchasing or owning handguns or concealed weapons. They could still bear arms by owning rifles or shotguns. Concealing a rifle is no easy task.

(2) Get tough on bullies. Persistant bullies should either be expelled from school, or if they are old enough and assault others, charged with assault.

(3) Mental patients that display symptons of violence should be removed form places where they can be a threat and treated.

Answer 5

Well, you have to understand the United States is not a place of "Follow the rules blindly and obey" people. We were founded by upstarts who didn't think they should have to blindly obey.
It wouldn't be "hard" to ban handguns, but it would be IMPOSSIBLE to make people give them up.
You'd have to find them. That law would not be passed here because VOTERS decide who runs our government and it's not a lifetime guarantee.

Why should a hunter be allowed to have guns? Why should he have more rights than me? Because he kills innocent animals to put their heads on a wall??? He doesn't pay one penny in taxes more than I do, his vote doesn't count one bit more than mine does. He's not in any more danger, or safer, than I am.
It's THAT silly logic that keeps banning guns out of the realm of possibility.

Answer 6

Well...England is a much smaller country than the US...that said, I have been in FAVOR of banning weapons for many years...guns are used to kill something (an animal) or someone...period...end of story. Why else would anyone have one???? My late husband managed get one, illegally, quite easily...he ended up using it on himself (and pointing it and threatening me...)..When you have looked down the barrel of a gun...and when you have seen someone die of a gunshot wound...it is enough to make you want ALL guns of ANY KIND banished forever....
The "guns don't kill people..people kill people" bullcrap, is JUST THAT,....BULLCRAP...Had the sad young man at VA Tech only had a knife and not been able to get a gun, the death toll would most likely be "0"....

Answer 7

I do agree that we should be changing our gun laws to mirror those of Europe. But the NRA will not allow this to happen. They are the biggest lobby and are in bed with the politicians.
The only way we can hope to change this is through voting and calling our reps
Only Law enforcement and hunters should have guns.

Answer 8

Dream on...

It would be much better to ban all auto traffic, 46,000 killed each year..but that seems to be ignored

Answer 9

yeah we should all give up our guns and just be sheep waiting for the wolves.