The U.K.’s Response to the Dunblane Massacre Should Inform Ours

20121215-172140.jpgIn 1996, a man walked into a school in Dunblane, Scotland armed with four handguns. He shot and killed 16 children before killing himself. A year later, after public debate on gun-control laws, strict gun control laws were passed, effectively making private ownership of handguns illegal in the UK.

Via WaPo:

LONDON — As the world joined Americans in mourning the school massacre in Connecticut, many urged U.S. politicians to honor the 28 victims, especially the children, by pushing for stronger gun control laws.

Twitter users and media personalities in the U.K. immediately invoked Dunblane — a 1996 shooting in that small Scottish town which killed 16 children. That tragedy prompted a campaign that ultimately led to tighter gun controls effectively making it illegal to buy or possess a handgun in the U.K.

“This is America’s Dunblane,” British CNN host Piers Morgan wrote on Twitter. “We banned handguns in Britain after that appalling tragedy. What will the U.S. do? Inaction not an option.”

Via Wikipedia:

The Dunblane school massacre occurred at Dunblane Primary School in the Scottish town of Dunblane on 13 March 1996. The gunman, 43-year-old Thomas Hamilton (b. 10 May 1952), entered the school armed with four handguns, shooting and killing sixteen children and one adult before committing suicide. Along with the 1987 Hungerford massacre and the 2010 Cumbria shootings, it remains one of the worst criminal acts involving firearms in the history of the United Kingdom.

Public debate subsequent to these events centred on gun-control laws, including media-driven public petitions calling for a ban on private ownership of handguns and an official enquiry, the Cullen Report. In response to this debate, the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 were enacted, which effectively made private ownership of handguns illegal in the United Kingdom.

We have to do something. We just have to. And that something does not include arming teachers or posting armed guards in classrooms, and anyone who would suggest such is insane.

Teachers are already underpaid and under-appreciated. Republicans have made it abundantly clear that they view teachers as expendable. And it is those very same Republicans who now suggest that teachers undergo combat training in order to protect themselves and their students.

It is insane.

Something must be done.

Am I suggesting that we ban handguns? No, not really. I am suggesting we have a sensible discussion about gun-control laws that leads to, as President Obama put it, meaningful action. I am suggesting that we not let this massacre become yet another statistic that we will look back upon in three days or three months or three years — whenever the next horrific massacre occurs.

I don’t know if we should ban all handguns. But I do know that arming more people or praying harder in schools is not the answer to the gun violence epidemic in this country.

[image via]

[cross-posted at ABLC]

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit
67 replies
  1. General Stuck says:

    It is insane to promote arming of teachers. But securing schools with some kind of professional in a low key manner, but also advertised to the world that if you go to a school to mass murder, there will be some defense. If you are serious about not having this likely to happen again, that is the only way.

    And this is not Great Britain, and it is not doing something, clamoring for banning guns in this country. Other than liberals and democrats committing political suicide. There are things to be done, to possibly keep some guns out of the hands of some people who do this kind of shit.

  2. Jay C says:

    “Inaction is not an option”

    And so it won’t be.

    Unfortunately, it is far more likely that the chosen course of “action” will be a well-financed and sophisticated nationwide campaign. AGAINST any further controls on handgun availability..

  3. Jay C says:

    “Inaction is not an option”

    And so it won’t be.

    Unfortunately, it is far more likely that the chosen course of “action” will be a well-financed and sophisticated nationwide campaign. AGAINST any further controls on handgun availability..

  4. Yutsano says:

    Tax and track the ammo. Reinstate the assault weapons ban. Licence all gun owners and mandate that training courses in firearm safety are necessary for gun liceces. Mandate that all gun owners must have liability insurance for each gun they own rated upon its danger to human life, with confiscation as punishment for all violations along with steep fines. Rights have responsibilities, it is time for gun owners to man up and start acting responsibly.

  5. Geoduck says:

    I don’t see it’s possible to do anything about the guns, but it’s within the realm of possibility to improve mental health services in the US and catch more of these people before they snap.

  6. weaselone says:

    In all fairness, if teachers received combat training the lack of respect shown to them by the public and politicians would probably decrease substantially.

  7. Litlebritdifrnt says:

    As I posted on your site Imani my Dad died the day of the Dunblane massacre, my mum said that my dad was carrying the souls of those children to heaven with him. Thank the FSM that the Dunblane massacre resulted in a hand gun ban in the UK that meant that deaths by hand guns are absolutely minimal in a population of 70 million. There was a chart posted recently which showed that gun deaths in the US out pace every other country in the world combined. The guns have to go. Period.

  8. 2liberal says:

    We have to do something. We just have to


    The estimated total number of guns held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,000

    Sorry but nothing will be done , no matter what your sense of urgency.

  9. clayton says:

    @General Stuck: You must live in a blue state.

    Just as people in certain states get all of the political advertising, those of us in red states get the constant barrage of gun dealers, gun talk radio constantly. Gun talk radio suggests putting their pro gun magazines in doctor and dentist offices.

    You all in the blue states who think it’s ok to live in a gun state don’t know what it’s like to live in a GUN STATE.

  10. General Stuck says:


    In all fairness, if teachers received combat training the lack of respect shown to them by the public and politicians would probably decrease substantially.

    Butter watch it. Cathyx will be around quizzing you on whether this is a good idea, or not.

  11. Nunca el Jefe says:

    Well, you can already see how hard it will be to convince people that full bans on weapons may be helpful (Stuck, @1). Maybe it was more about how possible it will be; I don’t care. Ours is a nation full of children, with this insane fucking gun fetish. To quote from a gun heavy movie, gun culture is dug in like an Alabama tick. I just really, really don’t understand, but the burden is not on me to explain why people don’t need guns. It’s time to make people that want that shit in our culture to start making the case for why such a dangerous tool should be so readily available. Given a choice why do we continue to perpetuate this particular stupidity? This is a choice that we, as a country, make and it’s a complete fucking disgrace.

  12. RepubAnon says:

    I like the Atlantic magazine writer’s messaging idea – lets start calling it “gun safety” rather than gun “control”. We definitely need to do something about the dangers posed by modern firearms – and re-branding the effort as “gun safety” puts the NRA in the position of being anti-safety… which is accurate.

  13. RSA says:

    And it is those very same Republicans who now suggest that teachers undergo combat training in order to protect themselves and their students.

    If it were also suggested that school teachers would need immunity against prosecution for accidentally shooting a child, I think some Republicans’ heads would explode.

  14. Wag says:

    In my dreams 15,000,000 progressives would
    Join the NRA with the sole purpose of redirecting the venerable organization back to its roots of promoting gun safety and away from wachaziod right wing conspiracy theories.

    Yeah, I know. Crazy.

  15. whidgy says:

    Tax and track the ammo.

    It seems that this would just penalize legitimate users rather than have any deterrent effect on crime. Serious skeet shooters shoot tens of thousands of rounds a year. (They reload and don’t buy ammo usually, of course, but I assume you’d want to tax components of ammunition, too.)

    Licence all gun owners and mandate that training courses in firearm safety are necessary for gun liceces.

    Wouldn’t have done anything to prevent this shooting.

    Mandate that all gun owners must have liability insurance for each gun they own rated upon its danger to human life, with confiscation as punishment for all violations along with steep fines.

    Wouldn’t have deterred this shooter, since he was not, apparently, the owner of the guns.

    The assault weapons ban might have had an effect. But then again the Norway shooter used a ruger “ranch rifle” which is not an assault rifle under most definitions.

  16. MonkeyBoy says:

    A sensible first step would be to ban all semi-auto guns and all separate magazines.

    There are no legitimate gun use (hunting, target shooting, self-defense) that require such things.

  17. General Stuck says:


    Was raised in Kentucky and now live in New Mexico, where everyday I meet peeps with a piece strapped to their legs in public, and others that are concealed. It is both a deep blue state and a gun state here in The Land of Enchantment. I don’t think there is another state quite like this one. And one reason why I love it here.

  18. ChrisNYC says:

    The UK has no (written) Constitution, no right to bear arms. No comparison, in terms of regulatory action between there and here.

  19. cathyx says:

    @General Stuck: Why don’t we just turn our public schools into military schools, with all the teachers armed and the students taught how to be good soldiers. This country is turning into a military state anyway, so this will just progress our agenda toward that goal. And then we can put the education department under the department of defense. Funding problem solved.

  20. magurakurin says:

    The estimated total number of guns held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,000

    Jesus wept. That’s like the definition of a fucked country. And Americans make jokes about the amount of weapons in places like Iraq and Libya.

    Personally, I can’t get my mind around the gun thing at all. I could give a shit if the 2nd Amendment was repealed in its entirety and there was an absolute ban on all guns of all kinds. I’ve never owned a gun, only actually touched one once and was scared shitless then even with it unloaded. I don’t need or want a gun. I’ve made it 50 years without one and I’m pretty sure I will make the last 20(or if I’m lucky, 30) without one.

    Fuck guns. Fuck the people who want and like guns. Seriously, fuck you and your guns. The blood of these children is on the hands of all those who want and own guns as far as I am concerned. It’s shit likes this that makes very happy of my adopted home, Japan. Japan has a lot of shit that is majorly fucked up, but they got it right on the guns and violence thing.

    Oh, and for old time blog aficionados, it looks like Billmon is now a front pager at KOS.

  21. mai naem says:

    @clayton: I am in AZ. Personally, guns scare me. I would never want to be responsible for somebody grabbing a gun I own and doing something evil with it. I know a woman whose one daughter was murdered by a gang banger and her other daughter was murdered by an ex-bf/stalker. She had a small gun with her at all times. She sleeps with it. I know a bunch of people who have guns who don’t lock them up. I had a discussion with an acquaintance who has a year old kid. He doesn’t lock his gun up. He says he’ll teach his kid not to touch his gun. What do you do with stupid people? I am not sure about the logistics of getting collecting hundreds of millions of guns. I’m just asking about the practicalities. The Swiss seem to have a decent system. You have to attend training annually and register, but Switzerland is a tiny country.

  22. JPL says:

    For some reason, the father of Adam’s statement brought upon a massive amount of tears. The first I shed..

    Our hearts go out to the families and friends who lost loved ones and to all those who were injured. Our family is grieving along with all those who have been affected by this enormous tragedy. No words can truly express how heartbroken we are. We are in a state of disbelief and trying to find whatever answers we can. We too are asking why. We have cooperated fully with law enforcement and will continue to do so. Like so many of you, we are saddened, but struggling to make sense of what has transpired.

    Was the young man that did this not loved… I just don’t know.. The little children were loved and they are now forever gone.

  23. elmo says:

    I mentioned this on one of the other threads – my Dad died yesterday morning. So my grief is all tied up with this sorrow as well .
    oh, and yesterday was also my birthday.

  24. RepubAnon says:

    @RSA: One commenter noted the rather odd Republican idea of giving weapons and combat training to school teachers – people that Republicans otherwise hold in contempt.

  25. cathyx says:

    @General Stuck: Why don’t we just turn our public schools into military schools, with all the teachers armed and the students taught how to be good soldiers. This country is turning into a military state anyway, so this will just progress our agenda toward that goal. And then we can put the education department under the department of defense. Funding problem solved.

  26. clayton says:

    @General Stuck: That explains a lot.

    You are used to it and so favor it. You don’t really consider the fact that lots of us live in gun crazy states and not only deal with what you describe , but also see the results in children dying — whether by accident or purposefully.

    So, you might be ok with what you have, but I’m sure far more of your fellow statesmen are not.

    Why should your voice count more?

  27. clayton says:

    @mai naem: Collecting guns has been done before.

    Take the guns out of all of their hands and who knows, maybe they have to work things out in a nonlethal way.

  28. pseudonymous in nc says:


    The UK has no (written) Constitution, no right to bear arms.

    Although the second amendment was inspired by the English Bill of Rights, which provided “[t]hat the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.”

    Andy Murray was a pupil at the school in Dunblane. I feel bad even mentioning this, because he’s been asked about it too many times in interviews. It was preceded a decade earlier by Hungerford, which brought an end to private ownership of semi-automatic rifles in the UK.

    I want the burden of making the case to fall on the people who want to keep their guns.

  29. clayton says:

    I’m very tired of walking around doing my business in fear of some gun nut getting pissed.

    It’s just wrong.

    And with the gun nuts taking over talk radio, I can only hope this is their death knell. It was bad enough when they put up websites saying Obama would take all of their weapons away when he had never said anything like that.

    They — the gun nuts — even those among us — have finally a price to pay.

  30. Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S. says:

    We need to own up to something in the U.S.: We think there’s nothing wrong with wacked-out gunmen walking into a school and blowing away a room full of five year old children. In this country, that’s just great. You want to slaughter fifteen children and tear apart thousands of lives of those left behind? Well, hey, then, have at it! Good luck to you! Good shooting!

    Over the next few days, and even weeks, we’re going to hear all kinds of lies about how this is a “tragedy” and how it’s “unacceptable”, but this is all bullshit. It’s great. Our society loves it. We can’t get enough of it.

    Ah, you say, but what about the uncountable politicians who will rise and denounce this latest spree? What about all that? Well, I recall a story I heard in one of my college history classes about Huey Long, when he was still the governor of Louisiana. It seems that some African Americans came to him to complain about some iniquity in Louisiana. As I recall, they were unhappy that African Americans couldn’t get work in the hospitals set up to serve blacks in Louisiana. Long told them that he’d get the hospitals opened to hiring African Americans, but he warned them, “Watch what I do, not what I say.” He then went out and made a stink about how white people were serving those damned coloreds in the black hospitals! The outrage! And he used that outrage to clear the white workers out of those jobs, and the hospitals began hiring African Americans.

    The point is that you can often learn more about what people truly believe by watching their deeds more than you can by listening to their words. Huey Long went out and ranted about how offensive it was that any white should have to do anything so demeaning as change a black patient’s bedpan. But by raising this stink, he opened up a lot of jobs for African Americans who needed them. He did what he needed to do in his time and place to help the black constituents who had come to see him.

    Watch what I do, not what I say. This is just as true in the U.S. in 2012 as it was in Louisiana in the 1920’s. For a few weeks, every politician and every pundit will bemoan this awful slaughter, and roundly and soundly condemn the fucked-up bastard who did this. Most of us American citizens will do the same. And some of us will even mean what we say. I will. Most of you here will. But a great many, far too many will not. They’ll be spouting empty words meant to get them a few minutes of good coverage (if they’re politicians or pundits) or to soothe their aching consciences (the rest of us). And, too, out society as a whole, while raising hell about this atrocity, really doesn’t give a damn. We–we as a society collectively, not each last one of us–just don’t care. The sad and ugly truth is that we like this kind of thing. We choose to let this happen to a few scores of our fellow Americans every year. We want this to happen.

    How can you say this, I can hear you asking. This is an appalling slander against the people of a decent country. And it is inflammatory. But it is also true. Anyone can see this, but we have to use Huey Long’s advice: Don’t listen to what we say as a society, don’t give any credit to our weeping and wailing about this tragedy. Watch what we do as a society to make these massacres less likely. You know the answer to that as well as I do: Nothing. We do nothing. Every year, some nut shoots up a school or a strip mall or an office or a city street. Most years it happens more than once. And we could write a few laws tomorrow and pass them and the president could sign them and it would, overnight, become far harder to wipe out a schoolroom full of children. It wouldn’t make impossible–nothing can do that–but it would make it harder; it wouldn’t end all of these sickening crimes, but it would cut down on them considerably.

    But we won’t do it. We won’t because, when it comes time to get beyond empty words and do something, to make a stand, we take the same stand every time: We do nothing to stop this from happening again. Indeed, every few years, we weaken gun laws. This is what our society chooses to do, and that’s what we need to own up to: When it comes time to choose what to do about these atrocities, every time, every time, we choose to let them go on happening. We’re free to choose who means more to us, the gunman over the kindergartner, and every time, we choose the gunman.

  31. clayton says:

    @General Stuck: Just because you feel confident that your solution is right doesn’t mean that you should ridicule someone who is trying to make a difference.

    You just want the same.

  32. The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge says:

    Ban all handguns, period.

    I am not a lawyer, I am not a judge, so obviously I am not a Supreme Court Justice (although neither of those is a prerequisite, is it now?), but anyone who thinks that the Second Amendment has any bearing whatsoever on handguns is abysmally ignorant.

    Never mind the rest of it, never mind that “Well Regulated” is a very precise technical term in 18th Century military parlance—a meaning that would give today’s gun nuts explosive bloody diarrhea if they were ever apprised of it.

    Never mind that “The People” do keep and bear arms—we have several things the Founders never imagined we could afford: a Standing Army, a Fleet in Being, a Coast Guard to do the real work that the Navy is too good to do, the Navy’s own private army, an Air Force, and National Guards in each state founded to protect the robber barons from the just wrath of their victims, and all armed from the public purse.

    Never mind all that. Anyone who thinks that “Arms” in the meaning of the Second Amendment was intended to embrace dueling pistols (or even Naval boarding pistols) is a moron. Since the latter is no longer an item, handguns serve no military purpose whatsoever. As officers’ sidearms, after it was determined that officers were too good to carry a real weapon and do any work, and it was too dangerous for them to lead their men into battle brandishing a sword, their purpose became to back up the column and shoot any potential deserters in the back. If this is no longer our policy, then they serve no purpose at all.

    As for police, Italy did fine for many years with carabinieri, we could do the same. As a bonus, they might have some chance of hitting the broad side of a barn. Honestly, if you’re supposed to be holding a pistol in both hands nowadays—which to be quite honest, makes you look like a fu¢king idiot—what’s the point of handguns in the first place?

    TLDR—the Second Amendment is absolutely irrelevant to the question of handguns.

  33. clayton says:

    @General Stuck: You think you are funny, but you aren’t. Just because you are fine with having armed people to interact with doesn’t mean it’s ok.

    Enjoy your guns. I’m pretty sure you won’t have that joy for long.

  34. General Stuck says:


    Enjoy your guns. I’m pretty sure you won’t have that joy for long.

    Since I don’t own any guns, the joy will last less than that.

  35. clayton says:

    @General Stuck: Then stop the advocating.

    Maybe there’s a God above
    But all I’ve ever learned from love
    Was how to shoot at someone who outdrew you
    It’s not a cry you can hear at night
    It’s not somebody who has seen the light
    It’s a cold and it’s a broken Hallelujah

  36. JoyceH says:

    One thing we need to do is counteract the right wing’s massively successful PR campaign that tells people that owning a gun will make them safer. We need to emphasize that the gun lobby is not an advocacy group, they’re PRODUCT merchandisers, and it’s their goal to convince people that they need to buy their product. It’s how they make their living.

    The reason there are so many guns is that people want them. Some of them are hunters and sportsmen, but a lot of them are just average folk who’ve been convinced that owning the gun (or guns) makes them safe. Nancy Lanza probably believed that – right up to the last moment of her life.

    And if we can’t get reasonable laws past, how about some widespread peer pressure? How about applying some good old-fashioned shunning to the gun owners we know? No, your kids can’t play with their cousins, and no, Uncle Herb is not invited to Thanksgiving, because Uncle Herb is a gun nut. And that’s just not acceptable anymore.

  37. mainmati says:

    @Yutsano: I completely agree. We can’t do anything about the the pistols and the assault weapons already out there though the latter should be banned right away.

    What the President should order – on the basis of national security and this really is a case of national security – is a total ban on big ammo clips and bullets used in assault rifles. I’m not a gun guy so I don’t know how this would work practically but the point is to severely restrict the things that actually do the damage, i.e. the bullets.

    Of course, that will create a black market. Good, make bullets really expensive and hard to get. Make the possession and sale of unauthorized bullets a severe prison sentence.

    Let’s also severely restrict carry laws so that people have to go to a police station and justify why they need their bullets. And those bullets should have markers on them to trace them to their owner.

    Hunters and sportsters have no problem. It is only the criminals, terrorists and Wayne LaPierre who should fear this proposal.

  38. CW in LA says:

    @The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge:

    TLDR—the Second Amendment is absolutely irrelevant to the question of handguns.

    Of course it’s irrelevant. The second amendment as originally conceived hasn’t been practiced for many, many decades, if it ever was.

    No, American gun culture is all about the first amendment: These limpdicks worship guns.

  39. Mandalay says:


    lets start calling it “gun safety” rather than gun “control”

    I like it! Elegant, simple and very powerful. And best of all this is something we can all start doing immediately.

    Maybe we can beat Frank Luntz at his own game for once.

  40. redshirt says:

    @elmo: Wow. Just wow. My condolences for your Father.

    My two cents, worth less, take it or throw it out the window: Do your best not to think about any of this stuff, at all. Distract yourself as utterly as you can – video game, movie, cook a gigantic meal, anything other than think about this terrible day. Since the more you think about it now, the more it will haunt you later.

    Best wishes. My thoughts are with you.

  41. General Stuck says:

    Then stop the advocating.

    For schools to be secured more than they are? I know it is an impure remedy, due to remotely being similar to republican ethos on guns in this society. But I will continue to advocate for safer schools, especially grade schools. That can mean all sorts of precautions, up to and including an armed professional. But not absolutely.

  42. redshirt says:

    @General Stuck: This is a crazy idea perhaps but it would be nice to have a small police office located near schools. Like a bank branch. This way the school is more secure, but also the surrounding area. Community policing is always superior, and what general area of town is more important to keep safe than a school?

    But like I said – crazy talk. Who’d pay for it?!

  43. zanamu says:

    I live in Nebraska, so I have to make choices. This is what I sent my “delegation” that “represents” me:
    I respectfully would like to know whether the Nebraska Congressional delegation is pro-life, or pro-NRA? Every police organization in the US has asked for regulation of semi-automatic weapons. That’s all – just the semi-automatics. No one needs to lose their ability to kill deer, or defend themselves. The person who killed twenty BABIES in Connecticut was able to fire over 100 bullets, and kill 27 people. At least having to take the time to chamber a bullet might have given someone some time to overpower him, or at least, keep some children from being killed. How can you, in good conscience, NOT act? How is inaction not a sin?
    I hate, hate, hate to use this argument, but maybe this is a baby step in encouraging legislators to care about people who are already alive, instead of the “unborn”. Mind you, nothing will happen from these guys, (though their heads might explode at the thought of pro-life and the NRA not being in lock step) but I really do like to point out these conflicts to them: the Nebraska delegation is not known for being a group of deep thinkers. Oddly, losing Ben Nelson will not make the situation better, which I find absolutely terrifying.

  44. magurakurin says:

    @General Stuck:

    reasonable suggestion especially considering it is one of the few things that could actually happen in America’s current political environment. There was a stabbing tragedy here in Japan in which a mentally ill man went into an elementary school and stabbed a group of children to death. Widespread security measures were placed all over the country in all schools and now the teachers and staff undergo routine training in how to deal with an intruder. I say do it.

  45. mainmati says:

    @JoyceH: We’ll probably find out more in future days about why Nancy Lanza, kindergarten school teacher wanted to own a highly lethal, military style weapon. That is really very weird. I think there is a lot more going to be discovered that is dark and deep and it’s not going to be about simple home protection in an otherwise very quiet neighborhood.

  46. General Stuck says:


    There was a case a few months ago, where some nut pulled out a gun and started shooting at several members at a city council meeting, until he was shot dead by an armed security guard. Those folks would likely not be here today, if not for that guard. And I am not for a fortress society in the least. But goddamit, I want there at least to be an opportunity to save some of the small children the Conn asshole systematically executed, unhindered only by how much ammo he had.

  47. Patricia Kayden says:

    Actually I love the UK response: ban all private gun ownership. That will never happen here though. I’m pretty sure that the writers of the 2nd amendment didn’t have the types of guns we have now in mind.

  48. Dream On says:


    But you might want to know that some people think there is a “legitimate” use for such guns:

    At first I thought you were being sarcastic. I did see your link, and it’s a bunch of sad, sad, sad deluded Energizer Battery Rabbits playing war in camouflage that doesn’t even fucking match the landscape. (They’d stand out just fine in a real war.) Everyone wants a “fun” weekend and all, but I don’t want anyone else dying for it. Assault-weapons fans are like the noise of that tool (yes, killing tool – not pseudo phallus) – loud and obnoxious. And really really dumb.

  49. Brett says:

    @General Stuck:

    Are you kidding me? Posting a guard in a school will stop shootings? Okay, say I’m a crazed psychopath. First thing I do is walk up to the guard (maybe from behind), and pull out my concealed gun and killing him. Problem solved. Taxpayer dollars wasted. Children and teachers killed. Oh, and some of those bullets will come from the dead guard’s gun, because, hey, free weapon!

    Dumb idea.

  50. General Stuck says:


    Oh please, enough of the purity shit and future telling. By your thinking, there shouldn’t be any police with guns, or at all. As criminals would just shoot them, then commit crimes, so we might as well save the money. It is beyond moronic to make your argument, but it is well within the precious left wing dogma of banning guns altogether and riding that pony into liberal utopia. And the cost? if only a single child doesn’t die, then how much is that worth to society?

  51. Buckyblue says:

    @2liberal: you’re exactly right. Or if something is done it will be of no consequence. We are a country that can’t govern ourselves. We can’t even provide basic safety for many of our citizens on a day to day basis. Forget CT, Chicago has been erupting all year and there’s nothing we can do.

  52. julie says:

    I can’t quite get my mind around the fact that they were his mother’s guns & she home schooled him. And he killed her before going to the school.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] lines to address the issues of mass shootings (you can read about how Scotland addressed it here, and how my adopted country Australia addressed it here). And yes, those of you who rightly […]

Comments are closed.