There was an armed security guard at Columbine and armed security personnel at Virginia Tech.

Yes there was, the shooters knew who was armed and targeted him first. Also he was trained to retreat and call for backup.

The idea of allowing someone be armed at school takes away the idea in a shooters mind that they will have no resistance. Also no one will know who is armed other than the principal.

Was representatives Giffords meeting in the shopping center or the shooting at the theater in Colorado in a "gun free zone"? Just asking.

George it is the only mass shooting that didn't happen in a GRZ.

George I misread you comment. Only the Giffords event didn't happen in a GFZ, it's I think the only one.

The movie theater in Aurora was not advertised as a 'gun-free' zone, nor was the house in Webster where the firefighters were shot, nor was the shopping mall in Portland.

Jackie the city of Aurora has a carry ban ordinance.

The shopping mall has a policy against carry there.

The shooter in Webster was a felon that was allowed to take a plea deal instead of a murder charge for killing his grandmama with a hammer. He used a gun which, he was forbidden to have, and ambushed those firemen.

If I was a teacher or principal and was forced to carry a gun I would be insisting on a pay raise.

Eenkling Nobody is forcing anyone to carry.

Gretchen I know several school employees that have contacted me wanting to be able to carry there. Nobody should make you carry if you don't want to, same as not making someone be made defenseless.

Guns and children obviously don't mix. They should've put metal detectors on entrances to all schools long ago.

Eenkling, Metal detectors? Is that what we as a society want? A police state at schools? What would it cost to man them?

A metal detector would have helped in Sandy Hook how? As if the shooter would have stopped at the entrance when they went off. Please, that's ridiculous.

Becky- Good point, obviously they needed that and a few more "no guns" signs. That would of stopped him, oh, and some more laws, that would have helped too.

Several states allow carry in schools (CA, OR, NH, AL). So GA is behind the Democrats of CA, OR, and NH on this. Why don't you trust the school empolyees? Many of them carry safely everyday while shopping, dining, going to the park, etc why not allow them the decency to protect themselves and our children at schools?

Don't wet yourself Eenkling when I say this. There are people all around you with CC permits and they probably have a gun on them.

And surprise they aren't going around shooting people.

I wonder if the husband of the CT school principal feels the same as you. I wonder how many parents of the dead children wish their principal was armed. I doubt the NRA had anything to do with this. Its just good sound advice. We should always take hard looks at who we elect; those with our best interests in mind make better lawmakers than those pushing for the UN to take control of our country.

Eenkling... your comments are priceless. That kool-aide is some strong stuff huh? Thanks for the belly laugh.

Its not a new euphemism. The GA permit is called a Weapons Carry License.

And that's fine. I'm sure someone in the school would be willing. Not every teacher has to be armed.

Not everyone should carry. It's not for everyone, only for those who can have a resolve to protect their charges no matter what.

"Just having a firearm is probably not much of a deterent unless the person is trained and "willing" to take a life. There are very few Legal gun owners and permit holders (military and Law enforcement excluded) who understand the feeling of actually putting a round into another human and the reality of your ability to take their life."

Here is a mom using a gun successfully without training other than her husband showing her what to do. It's the 911 tape of the Loganville mom that did what had to be done: http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/dramatic-911-call-released-in-intruder-shooting/nTrLK/

Harnett --- you made the wrong remark, its' not "......unless the person is trained and "willing" to take a life". You should have said, are you willing to "Protect" lives that would have been taken otherise".

Elizabeth, good questions and a good observation. "Would they be willing to do this?" is THE question if the backers of the second amendment actually believe in the first amendment.

I pointed out in my earlier post I know several folks that have a desire too. The training aspect is of course still up to debate, although trainers are stepping forward offering their services free or at a very discounted price. Of course a non-trained mom in the post above yours hit the bad guy with a percentage way better than almost all LE involved shootings. So the idea that an untrained person can't possibly be able is not true.
The idea of armed employees inside the schools is the best solution I have seen.

A bit of a slippery slope. I'm not opposed to trained security on site carrying but arming the principal may not be the best option. What to do if the principal is on vacation or sick? Who is appointed his/her surrogate? What if the surrogate is out in parallel? To many unanswered questions and what ifs including willingness as mentioned above.

John B. it's simple let other school employees be allowed to carry if they choose. These folks are background checked, we allow them to be involved in shaping our children's minds why not allow the them the ability to react if necessary? One thing that caught my eye about the CT tragedy is that the police department was 2.5 miles away, but the response time was over 10 minutes. We can't afford police in every school, but we can easily do what I propose with low/no cost and the response time will be seconds not minutes.

Jeff:
Again, not opposed to it and if other school employees are comfortable carrying then that makes more sense than to require the principal to do so if the principal is not all in. I say this because there is that thing called "intestinal fortitude." Training and a license to carry don't provide an inate ability to pull the trigger if necessary. That's what I mean by all in. You have to be willing and able.

Thanks John.

No, it is the solution. While living in Florida, all the schools my kids attended had armed Resource Officers (Sheriff's Deputies) from 7am to 4pm. And, I know for a fact, numerous other school personnel had guns in their trucks, cars etc. And, in order to get into the school, you had to pass by the deputies desk and the main office AND.... video cameras. If someone tried to get out or in via the fire doors, an alarm was sounded and numerous people would respond to the alarm, including the deputy. The years my kids were in school, there was NOT one incident of any kind invloving guns, knives etc.

Great answer. Too many responses to these tragedies have had more to do with personal agendas than an honest effort at a solution. I have been trying to find out more about the mental health aspect of background checks when firearms are purchased (yes, everyone, I know that wouldn't have changed a thing about Lanza's actions), but I still believe it is a reasonable bruise on a right to privacy to ensure someone without mental capacity is not buying weapons.

Eh, this article doesn't really address "no brainer" solutions. Eliminating 'assault' style weapons or high capacity magazines won't make much of a difference, if any. And since the last assault weapons ban went expired, incidents with this type of weapon have steadily declined. So how is limiting those weapons a 'no-brainer?'

This article also completely misses the idea of the 2nd Amendment. It's not for hunting, or even self defense against burglars. It's for self-defense against any threat, including our government. If the government has them, then as far as I'm concerned, so should we. I truly believe this was the Founders' purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

Do I think it will come down to an 'us vs the government' situation? No. Not really. But there is the chance. And we have zero chance if we're hopelessly outgunned....

I suspected as much, but was not sure of the "actual" answer.

Thanks NGW!

Terrie think about this......what right now is stopping teachers from snapping?

In fact show me an instance where a license holder has snapped and shot someone. These are responsible people as like teachers they must pass background checks, I know a few of them, and I would suggest that they are some of the most responsible and level headed folks I know.

I agree, Terrie. Thanks for posting. This discussion shouldn't be so partisan. The mass killing of innocents is an unacceptable horror and burden we all bear if we don't work together to create solutions to lessen, if not stop them. All good minds need to come together.

when you was in school there were no firearms

Very well said Jim! We do need to start with the building itself. More violence is not going to work in and of itself. We may get where it is necessary for teachers or principals to have to carry a weapon, but I would really hope that we have not come to that. The shooter in CT broke a window to get in because the doors were locked. What if there were none of those long windows next to the door? That might have been enough of a deterent. Who knows?

Here's my only problem with that - if you only have one way in, and nobody in the school is armed, then...what? The person with the only guns in the building will turn around because he has to come in one specific door? Do you really think that will happen? Again, there's nobody to stop him, at that door or anywhere else.

Do you have a suggestion?

Yeah, my suggestion would be to dial it way back. Adding more guns to the mix in the hands of barely trained people sounds like a sure recipe for disaster.

So...by dialing it way back, what, make guns REALLY illegal to carry into a school?

That's my point, NGW. All I'm saying is we don't just want to have a law passed on Friday, and on Monday all teachers with a CWP show up with their guns. We need to think this through and make sure we have the right people and the right training for them.

Shane- You and NGW are quite right in your thinking. Question- Would it be a matter of a law being passed, or one removed? I like the idea of just removing the law that doesn't allow educators to arm themselves. Passing a new law is not necessarily a good idea.
"Laws are like lies, once one is made, it must be followed by countless others."
- H.C. Horsman

Racer-X... see this comment above. http://peachtreecorners.patch.com/articles/is-arming-school-principals-the-answer-to-school-violence#comment_5995358

Not true. I'd hate to see the teacher that saves a bunch of kids that had to use an 'illegal' firearm to do so. They'd wind up UNDER the jail...

:-)

Well said.

Thanks Karsten- As far as using a gun vs brandishing a gun, I have always believed they should be the same thing. I pretty much feel that the only way anyone should know you have a gun is because you are firing at them. Pulling a gun and threatening to shoot shows a lack of resolve, which is how you get dead.
If a parent is rowdy or makes terroristic threats, somebody needs to be dialing 911 and summoning the police to handle him/her. If the ass-wipe makes good on his threats by pulling a weapon, then he should be blown away, without hesitation, by someone who he had no idea was even armed.
If an educator carried properly, with any luck, they could teach 30 years with no one ever knowing they were armed.
By they way, have you checked out the new Walther PPQ? Probably one of the best PC (Personal Carry) weapons available today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_QhiTa-7OA

The NRA and gun manufacturers should and could fund that expense, especially if they continue to be obstacles to some of the solutions. The majority of gun owners want better and more background checks, better firearm legislation and enforcement. It's in their best interests.

I'm with Jim - modify and secure all the school buildings, have police officers (trained people whose job it is to know how to protect the public without endangering the public) stationed at the inside perimeter accesses. We guard our money, our celebrities, our politicians, but not our most precious treasures - innocent human beings. We spend billions everyday on foreign soil. That money should be spent on American soil.

Those solutions would be money well spent, from public safety to putting people back to work. I'm conflicted about allowing the faculty and support staff to carry (definitely should not be limited to a known-to-be designated person). There are too many risks, and there should be beyond-normal care in determining who is allowed and qualified. Our educators should not have to be our school police. They have enough responsibility as it is.

Here's a scary bit of info on the infamous AR-15:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/01/07/slide_fire_this_simple_legal_add_on_lets_an_ar_15_fire_900_rounds_per_minute.html

GGY- The NRA and gun manufacturers cannot and should not fund that expense. It would literally cost billions of dollars. However, I do hope that some of these ideas are incorporated in future school construction.
No, in fact, most gun owners do not want any new legislation, enforcement or any other restraints put on gun ownership as it is not in our best interests by any stretch of the imagination.
I will agree that having a police officer handy might be a good idea, but not so many that the kids feel imprisoned. We should not live in fear. What kind of freedom would that be? School security should be handled at local levels with NO federal involvement as each community has different needs and the Feds just screw everything up that they touch anyway, at 10X the price.
As far as hiring security as a way to put people back to work, no way. I don't want some out of work flunky guarding my kids. You will find that all the really good cops are employed already or available through police training academies, no rent-a-cops for my kids.
How about addressing mental health issues better? How about increasing the accountability of crappy parents?
We cannot and should not look to the government to solve all our problems. We should look at ourselves.

Yeah, that slide fire is pretty cool.

And again, if the government has automatic weapons, the public should be able to. But that's another discussion for another time....

So, you want to force companies to pay money for things not related to their day to day operations? How very socialist of you.

And how are they obstacles to some of the solutions? Obviously we have very different ideas of what the solutions are....

Racer, they could and should. You're wrong about majority of gun owners. That may be the consensus on the Loganville-Grayson Patch threads. http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/14/16510092-poll-majorities-favor-assault-weapons-ban-background-checks?lite The NRA gun lobby promotes anyone buying whatever type of gun and ammo they want.

There are lots of law enforcement people out of work. Did I say rent-a-cop? If school security is beefed up to include more SROs, they should all be well-trained, screened and qualified. We're already living in fear and the gun proponents are largely the reason. It's better to live in fear and have more LE in our schools and public places than go there and not live at all anymore. I don't like that at all, but some unpalatable measures are going to be necessary.

I have said over and over in my comments that mental health issues are at the forefront of the problem. You just haven't paid attention to what I have said as you have been too busy sharpening your personal attacks on me with your friend. I really hope that nonsense is over.

Not everyone has wonderful, loving, intelligent, upstanding citizen parents. That's not going to magically and quickly happen. Lots of kids have the worst or none at all.

I'm not looking to the govt. to solve all problems and neither are most people. Tax money is being collected and should be used for the benefit of the people.

Yes, Karsten, I want the people who said we should put more armed people in our schools to pay for it. That's not socialist, that's justice.

No, private citizens do not need automatic weapons and buttloads of ammo, any more than they need tanks, nuclear weapons, hand grenades, bombers and drones. Those are military weapons. For the m i l i t a r y.

You know full well how the NRA has obstructed and distracted on the problems and the solutions. The gun manufacturers use the NRA to get whatever they want in DC, throwing mega money to do it. They try to blame everything else but the killing machine industry.

GGY- You are wrong. You said "The majority of gun owners want better and more background checks, better firearm legislation and enforcement". The link you provided to support this statement concerns a survey made of the general public, NOT gun owners, PLUS....it is from NBC News, another puppet of the administration.
Please provide a link to make your point that there are a lot of police officers out of work..
Tax money is indeed being collected, but it should be used to pay off our debt and not for more costly, ineffective, federal. "programs".
The US is broke, we have no money, we are borrowing it from the Chinese. If you owed a credit card $50,000, do you think the solution would be raising the credit limit? Of course not. The solution would be to stop spending and tighten your belt. That, my friend, is what our government needs to do, right now.
Guns are being used to distract us from our nations real issues. Guns are not the problem, the government is the problem. By letting them divide us and argue about things like this, we are being distracted from what they are really doing.
Our country is more divided now than ever and that's they way they want it.

True of that link. But, there is evidence of what gun owners support. I read that only 6% of gun owners are members of NRA, so that's really no surprise. I know - you want that link, too. I'll have to do more digging to find it, but it was a recent report. However, I would be wasting my time as you wouldn't believe it anyway. NBC is a corporation owned by who? - Republicans, mostly, and run by their money, just as Fox is owned and run by right-wing money. Have you ever listened to Tom Brokaw-definitely Republican? That doesn't mean the research or reporters are flawed. It's just an easy comeback for you.

Except for FBI, CIA, SS, police officers are local, not federal. Tax money can't all go to paying down the debt. Using some of that DoD money and NRA money wouldn't hurt the budget or the deficit. State and local budgets all over the country have been cut, and LE, teachers, first responders have been scaled back. Where have you been that you didn't know this? A large percentage of the unemployed are public worker layoffs.

Austerity measures aren't going to help the economy, which is improving. A balance of increased revenue and intelligent spending cuts will do that and reduce the debt.

The debt ceiling is to cover the existing bills already approved by Congress - House of Representatives. All spending bills originate in the House. The debt is about what has been spent and the interest on it, from mostly the last 12 years. Wars cost a chunk of change.

The cost of all of those renovations would be exorbitant. If those funds were available they should be spent on the education systems as school budgets continue to cut get to the bare bone. We can't psycho proof the world including the young and innocent. Training school personnel to handle firearms is the expeditious and most cost effective measure at this point. The root cause is not guns, it's people with wiring so crossed they can take lives without conscience. Mental illness needs to be addressed.

GGY- Still waiting for that link about all the "out of work" police officers.

GGY- while you're looking for that link for Racer X, do some research on the cost of the wars...the total for 11 years in Afghanistan and 9 years in Iraq is approximately $1.4 trillion dollars ($800 billion for Iraq, $600 billion for Afghanistan)...thats about equal to one years worth of Obama deficits, and he's done that for each of the last four years...

@Racer - impatient aren't we? I didn't set a timetable for this, but here you go:

http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=2602
** Data are based on information and survey results from: the National Association of Counties; International Association of Chiefs of Police; Major Cities Chiefs Association; Police Executive Research Forum; The National League of Cities; the Fraternal Order of Police; Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics and application data from the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. For a copy of the full report entitled the Impact of the Economic Downturn on American Police Agencies, please call 800.421.6770, or visit the COPS Office website at www.cops.usdoj.gov.

I know this won't satisfy you. There are more references.

Jimmy, you mean those wars that were started under Bush/Cheney? The one's Congress agreed to pay for on the credit card? The debt which continues to accumulate interest on its principal? Those wars? Do you think the President is not supposed to pay the nation's bills that preceded him? Do you think he had a normal economy to deal with right out of the gate? Between 700k and 800k jobs being lost right before he took office and had to implement policy to stop the backward slide into a Depression? The stimulus bills that Congress approved to keep that from happening? Your boat don't float.

Yes, GGY, those would be the wars I was referring to...if my boat isnt floating, its because its been overloaded by the weight of $6 trillion worth of deficit spending during just four years of Obama. Instead you complain about $1.4 trillion spent over 11 years...

I'm complaining about more than the $$, Jimmy. I'm complaining about the rebuilding of Iraq, too. But, mostly, I'm complaining about the human damages - maimed and crippled returning soldiers, innocent civilians killed in a foreign land (lots of children), and the blood of our people who came home in caskets, spilled on that far away land.

You're partially right, Racer. AR-15s and that type of firearm/ammo and people are the problem, or at the root of it.

I don't expect to convince you of anything Karsten, and I'm not trying to. You're the one asking me and I'm giving my opinion. Which you automatically, knee-jerk, shoot down (pun intended). You and Racer are actually supporting my view. You say it's not the guns - it's the people. Exactly! Separate the military-style assault weapons and ammo from the PEOPLE! That's a huge part of the solution that's being considered. Yes! I want the NRA to pay for armed guards in the schools if we go to that. They want to hang onto those bad weapons, they should feel the pain (pun intended). We do allow people to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights and carry - it is largely the problem, as they can get hands on whatever they want.

Without the public education system, the USA would be a third-world country.

You mean Powell the Republican that endorsed Obama? Not a good example and I have much respect for Powell.

Colin Powell is a very smart man. He voted for the best man for POTUS. Who can blame him after Bush/Cheney lied us into an Iraqi war and invasion and used him to do it. Very smart man. No crazy stuff with him. And yet, he's still a Republican. You all should be proud of that.

Is (Ret.) Gen. Stanley McChrystal a flawed example, too? You know, he's the man whose men disrespected their Commander in Chief.
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/08/former-gen-mcchrystal-assault-rifles-are-for-battlefields-not-schools/

There will be other prominent leaders joining in on this issue with these experts on military weaponry and firearms in general. Throw up all the objections and brick walls you can, but pardon me if I choose to believe them over some local gun owners.

X- it's akin to a plane crash that takes out sometimes hundreds of people in one incident. It gets a lot of attention because the devastation is so isolated and many are affected. I have a feeling this too will pass with very little change. What happened was tragic no doubt but to your point we need to exercise some common sense and logic without the emotion. Unfortunately the white house is running on emotion right now. There are more important issues to address like the debt ceiling and cavalier spending that continues to tank our economy.

Talk and type until you're blue in the face and fingers are numb. This is about the firearms capable of sending 150 bullets at 6 yr olds in a matter of a few minutes.

GGY- "Slides" is a CIA term for a conditioned type of response which dead ends a person's thinking and terminates debate or examination of the topic at hand. You are a perfect example of what happens to people who live in front of the box, you are programmed.

There you go again with your attacks, Racer, simply because I disagree with you. This one's mild, but I'm not holding my breath that won't change, and soon.

It is you and your gun culture that has been programmed.

GGY- Think what you want, you won't find me sitting in front of the Programming.
I have said what I can. Have a good day.

As usual, you are right. High capacity magazines keep a homeowner from running out of ammo before he/she runs out of bad guys. Limiting magazines would be a victory for the bad guys, but then again, look who is considering it, Congress, no wonder.

Congress doesn't want to spend the money on mental health, or any other health, except their own.

GGY- Now you are getting on the right track, stay on that one.

Tammy- I believe that many teens are prescribed drugs to compensate for poor raising. Instead of being given an equal mix of discipline and love when they were toddlers, they are given drugs when they mature.
I believe it is a darn shame that you don't need any kind of training or license to do the MOST important job in the world, being a parent. I cannot understand that just because some sperm donor and his playground pump out a child that they automatically think they now suddenly have any idea what they are doing.
If ANYTHING needs regulation, it should be who is allowed to procreate.

Tammy, I have been mentioning the mental health aspect of these atrocities - from day one. Yet everyone who wants to debate (attack) me on my opinion that there is a multi-faceted problem needing a multi-faceted approach ignores that. I am one of the few who has repeatedly included the mental health problem that is mostly ignored in this country because it costs too much to fix or even try to.

But, we cannot use the mental health issue as a distraction and scapegoat for all the other issues on gun violence that need solutions.

Racer, I have been on the right track from the start. You do know that the Republican-controlled House of Representatives is in charge of originating spending bills and holds the country's checkbook, don't you? Start there with your complaining. You won't get very far, but never hurts to try.

Oh, and Racer - you pound your chest about 2nd Amendment rights, but want to take away the most basic of God-given human rights - procreation? I thought you were all for freedom. No human being was ever born who came with an instructional guide, and yet, most human beings are inherently decent. The only perfect one was Jesus Christ. What side of this issue would He be on do you think?

Thought you were done, Racer. I'll do, write, think and say what I want - not what you want. You and others on here don't want another side to be presented, that's obvious. I don't play to you and you alone, Racer, or really anyone. I follow my conscience and my heart. What does TV have to do with this besides being another source of information? I think you should just change the channel and also get off all those right wing blogs where you must get your stuff, along with the gun trade rags. You're wrong - not all of Congress controls the $$. The House holds hostage any good legislation because it can. Of course, it would help if the Senate would reform its procedure rules and they quit overusing the filibuster. The do- nothing-goods.

I have a question for you Racer? Are you capable of writing anything in reply to me that isn't judgmental, bossy or eventually, in violation of Patch rules?

So, you and "we" won't allow it? That attitude is a losing one, and it's the very reason the population is so polarized. You don't get to choose what the nation will do about this. You can make a lot of noise, true, and so can the reasonable side.

I think we're getting close to the part where GGY has a temper tantrum and screams PATCH...please help me....good grief.

And there he is, too. I knew he couldn't control his bad behavior for long.

Irrelevant and outdated.

The President has quite a respectable resume beyond his work in helping the people of Chicago who had little-to-no voice. How about you?

That was a rhetorical question. I'm not interested in you. Your comments are irrelevant and outdated. How old are you, 80? (another rhetorical question)

Oh yeah, very impressive. While in Congress for a couple of years, managed to vote 'present' more than anybody else. Never held a real job. But other than those things, yeah, very respectable. (Yes, that was sarcasm)

You need to do more research, Karsten. He was a professor and a lawyer, then in the Illinois state senate, and now he's our twice-elected President. All paying positions.

Oh, the Pres, too. YAY!

I don't think so. I made her cry and leave. GGY is much more grounded and intelligent....

There's one of me. How many of you?

Karsten, you only try to be a bad boy.

Are you confessing to something, Karsten? Please, fill me in. Sounds juicy.

Yeah, I'm just way too nice to be bad...

Nothing, really. She was just a bit spacy, and it was time for her to go back to whatever it was she did before coming here. I like people with varying opinions, as is obvious or I would spend more time on places like the Fox News website or go find like-minded groups on Facebook, but that would be boring. But what I don't like is people that are just silly, and unable to back up anything they say, ever. She drove me nuts....

She must have gotten under your skin. Sounds like a savvy person to me if she could do that to the opposition. Maybe you only thought she couldn't back up her opinions, like you think I can't or you won't admit to. But, really, Karsten, that's only because you disagree, not because of a lack of facts. Bet it was the same with her.
I don't like everyone else's style myself, but they have the right to comment, state their opinions and not be attacked for them.

If she was harassed as much as I am, I can understand why she left. She probably found a place where there was more maturity than is found on Patch, especially the Loganville-Grayson edition. L-G has quite the reputation for vicious posters. Or, obviously, a Democrat, so maybe her mission was accomplished. Her guy did win. Mine, too.

So, what did you do to make her "cry"?

She thought her identity was compromised and tragically left us without notice. For your edification she was a real tool! She was condescending, self absorbed, pompous, snarky, and had a copyright on being right. When someone disagreed with her far left views she would have frequent meltdowns and scream for the PATCH to intervene. ;D

John B.- Hmmmmmmm......frighteningly similar. Also, she hated to referred to by her initials.

Aha . . . she did get to you boys! Kudos to her! Sounds like she was shamelessly bullied. Proud of yourselves? Most macho men (wannabes) don't like or know how to deal with an intelligent woman, knowledgeable on the political front, who will stand up to them. My guess is she realized how badly she was wasting her time.

Racer, I don't mind initials. I do mind personal attacks, bad language and dirty talk.
This is a public forum and folks should be respectful of each other, and mindful that if they wouldn't want their mama or children to read it, they shouldn't write it.

Haha! So, John B., in other words she was a smart lady. You couldn't rattle her except by bullying, could you? Now I get it. Thanks for the "edification".

Oh, Karsten, you often take me too literally. I know the NRA would never pay for or be made to pay for anything except lobbying and campaign contributions. But it is a lovely idea :D

Those guns weren't around during the time of our FFs. They couldn't have conceived of the damage caused by their illicit use. I believe if that were the case, the 2nd would have been quite clear about "arms".

The last assault weapons ban had a big fat gaping hole, allowing sales to take place at gun shows without background checks.

Thanks, Tammy. It's not a simple problem that has to be tackled. My opinion is that most of the crime is drug related, which leads to desperation, greed and violence. It will take generations to fix this and any of our cultural issues, if ever, but much of the noise comes from the group defending the gun culture. They must realize it is in their best interest to join in to help, not hinder. I know I would have a lot more respect and find it easier to listen to the hardcore viewpoint many of them hold if only they would acknowledge that. I can't be the only one who believes this.

GD- Supporting our constitutional rights should never be looked at as "hardcore". The only people any gun legislation is going to affect are law-abiding citizens. Laws do not protect people from those who disregard them. Removing semi-automatic rifles and limiting handgun magazine size will only shift power to criminal elements.
This distraction from reality needs to be dropped and issues like the ones outlined in Tammy's above link need to be focused on.

Another delusional post by Racer.

Uh....what? Street thugs aren't evil deranged killers? They act indiscriminately without conscience taking out innocents of all ages. How many times have you heard of a child killed in the cross fire of street thugs? Add it up and it far surpasses the isolated "en masse" shootings.

You have a severe reading disability, John. Re-read, please the entire sentence before you comment. See that word "en masse" - as in the school shootings, mall shootings, theatre shootings, etc. None of those horrors were committed by a street thug. I did not say that street thugs aren't evil deranged killers. Try again, or don't.

And did you just accidentally make the case for more handgun control? Yes, I do believe so. :)

uh...you have a comprehension problem but I'll attribute that to you being old...

No, I got from his comment the need for more privately armed citizens. Again, these thugs are going to have the guns anyway. Don't see them turning in their guns just because their President told them to.

But maybe I'm wrong....

Actually, I'm not old, but you have an old white guy's world view, John. Age doesn't matter.

You just don't include the gun issue in the solutions and that won't work. It's all in, no exclusions for the solutions. And yes, you are wrong. :)

GGY- You're right, it's not street thugs, it's Democrats:
Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat ~ Muslim
Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered
Democrats and progressive liberals
Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~
Registered Democrat
Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama
campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal
Connecticut School Shooter- ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians.
What do you say to that Bessie.

Don't know about Bessie, but I say you're hardcore mentally challenged and uneducable :D

Isn't it past your bedtime?

GGY- Time for bed? Is that an invitation? Please, I just ate :-)

Racer, get some psychiatric help. You're a real sicko.

I'm serious. You have a problem with the female gender. I bet I'm not the only person who has diagnosed you.

Actually, I greatly respect the majority of women I meet. It's just you whom I disrespect.

Racer, a man with integrity and honor respects others, women, too. You don't. You single me out because I have a world view you disagree with and I won't cower at your insults. That's not at all manly. You must feel threatened by me. You shouldn't. While I don't agree with and often cringe at the things you write, I respect your right to say them. Unfortunately, I don't get to enjoy that on Patch without someone following me around from thread to thread to pounce with venom. Based on what I have read, you only respect other women who agree with you. I'm not the only one you disagree with, but the only one you and your friends stalk/haunt/harass/pester. That shows what you all are about and discredits anything you say.

You, too, Karsten? Give me a break. Yes, it is what I said and it was mangled for the purpose of stating his "agenda" - a favorite word of yours that you both will recognize and understand. More twisters than tornado alley, you two. It is critical for logical thinking and response to read EACH WORD IN CONTEXT. "Street thugs aren't the evil deranged killers shooting little kids en masse." Let me translate:
street thugs aren't THE (SAME) evil deranged killers shooting little kids en masse (schools, malls, theatres, etc.)

Ah, but I fully realize it is futile to communicate with you two. That doesn't mean other intelligent and reasonable people don't get it.

If gun owners don't admit that there's a gun culture problem, the other solutions won't work toward enough good. They need to come to the table like the big brave men they claim to be, and face facts - it's about guns, too.

Gun culture. Not guns. The culture around these thugs and others is the problem. Needs to be addressed. Me and those I know with the guns are not the problem. Responsible people are not who we need to take guns from, that's not going to help anybody.

I'm also a little confused as to what you mean by 'gun culture.' Could you elaborate a bit?

Karsten, please. You know what gun culture is. It's you.

So....in other words, you can't define it. Thanks for clarifying....

Well, I did define it. It's you. You don't know who you are? Not my problem.

That was a good one. Must have taken you all day to think of that retort.

And it stills tells me you can't define it. Unless you think 'gun culture' is those people that own guns. Or is it the ones that just like guns? Or those that believe we should have them? Because there's plenty of people out there that believe in our right to have them that haven't bought any. You know, those people that believe in the 2nd Amendment.

Maybe THAT'S your definition. "Gun culture" is that subculture of people that believe in the Constitution! Perfect, glad we could come to that understanding....

Don't pat yourself on the back, KT. I would never waste that much time on you and yours. I'm just a little sick of the attacks, dreading the sure-as-shootin' assault - don't you like that phrase? ;) that I know will come with anything I write, and didn't want to expound upon it. Makes me sigh-inducing weary at times.

But, here you are go - the gun culture, based on everything I have read on the subject from you. . . your mentality is the gun culture. The gun culture is the subset of society that thinks owning whatever type of gun and ammunition you want to have is more valuable and important than the right of innocents to expect to go to school and return home again, or go to the movies, shop at the mall, attend a concert or political event, go to the store to buy food for your family, go to work, etc., and not be shot to shreds because they went to those places and didn't hide in an arsenal-filled bunker instead.
The gun culture may or may not include sensible, responsible, honorable gun owners, but it certainly includes those who consider them as playtoys for their entertainment and enjoyment, those who are careless with their storage and use, those who build their macho-man image on them, those who use them to threaten and intimidate others, those who would turn them on their own families in a moment of rage.
(continued . . . )

The gun culture includes those who use the 2nd Amendment as a front, an excuse, for whatever reason they have for justifying their ownership of military-grade weapons.

The gun culture includes, to the largest degree, the NRA, blood-sucking lobby that it has become, and gun and ammunition manufacturers. It includes the greedy, corrupt Congress people who will do their bidding for campaign funds and to ensure they're not black-balled for re-election.

There, whew! I think I got it all out. I feel better. Thanks for pushing me, Karsten. Aren't you glad you asked?

Thank you, Rebecca. I can make your job easier. Most of the abusers are following me. I do return their fire, but usually I'm just giving them what they want by doing so. It would really be nice to be able to post and not dread the next unnecessary exchange that will inevitably appear, no matter the subject. Some of them may not know what constitutes a "personal" attack, but most know only too well.

LOL...good grief...good grief....you're the biggest offender but somehow think you're exempt. And no one has to follow you anywhere....you post a thousand times to each and every blog....trust me...I'm trying to avoid you but it's impossible because you're the resident expert on well.....everything.

You give me too much credit, JB. 1000s? Too funny. I may post more than you, but unlike you I address the topic. You often write only for the purpose of attacking. I post way less than others and not on all articles and blogs.

If Patch finds my comments offensive, I have no problem with them being deleted. It would be nice to know the reason but not necessary. If others find my comments offensive they can flag them and Patch can decide. If you and your buds don't like my comments you enjoy your personal attacks and taunts. Are you in the category of not knowing what a personal attack is, or the one in which you know and delight in making them?

Yes! I agree to most of your post, but not so sure any person, teacher, should carry in the schools.

That's not true. There are plenty of comments on topic, it's just that you and your posse just zoom in on mine.

Well, I'm sure you won't waste any time finding another blog where you can post your torture of logic. Who said that? That was spot on.

I'm not complaining to Patch. I made an observation. I think it just hit too close to home with Karsten and company.

There she goes again, "That's what you are but what am I?" Pretty soon I am expecting "Nanny nanny boo boo, stick your head in doo doo".
Since we all know mental illness is a big problem, can we start by all chipping in for some counseling for GGY? Or perhaps a muzzle? Straight-jacket? Paper bag?