Which do you think would do more to prevent shootings?
Friday, December 26th, 2008 | Law & Ethics
Which do you think would do more to prevent people from shooting a bunch of people then committing suicide:
1- More gun control laws. (Preventing unstable people from buying guns and mandating that gun owners keep their guns locked up)
2- Banning the media from publishing shooters’ names (like they do in some court cases with juveniles) so that nobody will think they can get famous by pulling that kind of stunt.
12 Comments to Which do you think would do more to prevent shootings?
neither…
gun control laws do not protect the public from criminals, because criminals inheirently do not obey the law to begin with.
fame has nothing to do with the rage of a psychotic killer.
December 29, 2008
I’ll go w/ #2. And I plan on completely ignoring any new gun laws, we have enough already.
January 2, 2009
I think your asking for an oversimplification of a complex problem. Most people agree that there are a variety of variables to take into consideration when trying to prevent shootings. It’s all about taking a multi-pronged approach.
January 4, 2009
Gun laws don’t work. If you want to aquire a firearm, you will.
How about not glorifying the life of that scum bag. Just like they did with that cho guy, they made it seem like he was larger than life, shoung his stupid picture and video 24-7. if they would have reported him as the scum he is, it might not have given the idea to that mall shooter. He said right in his sucide note he wanted to be remembered, and that is exactly what he got. Why doesn’t the media focus on the 8 people that are now dead 2 weeks before christmas?
January 6, 2009
There are already tens of thousands of gun control laws on the books in the nation so obviously that is not the answer. Seriously too if you put gun ownership in the hands of mental health experts you create a real problem for a free society.
Free press important but there was a time when our media was at least respectful. Not any more; but I still don’t beleive you can “ban the media” from reporting; but someone needs to ask them not to sensationalize these tragedies so that they are mimicked and repeated.
January 8, 2009
I think everybody should have a gun, however bullets should cost a a thousand dollars each.
January 10, 2009
Tougher prison sentences for convicted criminals.
January 14, 2009
Give everyone a gun. Eventually, that will thin the bad gun owners out enough so these episodes will cease.
January 16, 2009
Lock up people with mental problems before they commit murder
Every mass murder has demonstrated mental problems before committing their crimes.
The answer is 2
January 16, 2009
2.
In some cases, I also think it would help if parents who have kids would spend the better part of their young kids’ lives alongside them and teach them the value and meaning of life (Instead if pursuing personal careers and ambitions).
When necessary they should spank their young kids asses to ensure and instill the concept of punishment for bad deeds.
January 20, 2009
How on earth do you think gun control laws can possibly reduce these sorts of shootings?
“Most” of the people who’ve done these shootings recently (The latest one was an exception) were already prohibitted by law from owning guns.
Here’s a shocker - people who’re planning to commit a crime like mass murder don’t stop and say “Oh, I shouldn’t buy a gun off the street to kill all these people, because that’s against the law”.
What WOULD stop these sorts of crimes would be making it much easier for ordinary law abiding people to get concealed weapons permits. Had a significant number of people in the Omaha mall been armed, the shooter wouldn’t have been able to run rampant like that.
Richard
January 20, 2009
Good question and most of these things have been happening since the SSRIs like Prozac, Effecsor, Paxil have hit the market. West Virgina has passed laws so a person with a mental condition cannot legally buy a gun.
The Columbine nuts were on SSRSs, but the media really covered it up and i feel it is because of the powerful drug companies.
Anyone on one of these pills needs to be monitored. Some folks they are a real help, others have sinus, craps, aggravation, and all sorts of problems. If for depression, Europe has used and the doctors give 90% of the peole a natural stuff called St. Johns Wort, grown here in the US. If you take that and get real edgy, then an SSRI may not be for you. jAlso the ones that effect your dopimine are real serious. It would be interesting to see how many of these cases are related to or if the people werer on an SSRI. Take care. Also the drug companies should not be able to put out a drug until it is completely tested, no more testing on the general public.
Categories
- Basketball
- Books & Authors
- Celebrities
- Civic Participation
- Current Events
- Economics
- Government
- Higher Education (University +)
- History
- Homework Help
- Immigration
- Law & Ethics
- Law & Legal
- Law Enforcement & Police
- Malaysia
- Marriage & Divorce
- Media & Journalism
- Movies
- Other - Business & Finance
- Other - Cultures & Groups
- Other - Education
- Other - Family & Relationships
- Other - Politics & Government
- Other - Science
- Other - Society & Culture
- PDAs & Handhelds
- Personalization
- Politics
- Polls & Surveys
- Psychology
- Reality Television
- Religion & Spirituality
- Tennis

December 27, 2008