Gunman can't read, enters Maine elementary school

No. The major problem with gun violence in the US is we have thugs breeding a new generation of thugs. We need to get to the root of the problem by returning to our Judeo/Christian family values, not restricting guns. When I went to school we had a rifle team and we carried our rifles down the hallway with ammo in our pockets and no one would have even thought of shooting another person. All of my children were raised with guns in our house and all but one of them have guns in their homes. None of them has ever shot anyone or would consider doing so unless it was in self/family defense. Guns are not the problem, thugs are the problem.

Barbarian notes the evidence:
So there aren’t that many shootings in the public schools after all?

Imagine that. Do you suppose that the lack of guns in the schools and the ready availability of guns elsewhere, might have something to do with it?

No. The major problem with gun violence in the US is we have thugs breeding a new generation of thugs.

And you’re arguing the lack of shootings in public schools isn’t due to a lack of guns, but rather because there are no thugs in public schools? Do you have some evidence for that?

It seems you can not read, it may be because you went to a public school in Chicago. I said, “The major problem with gun violence in the US is we have thugs breeding a new generation of thugs.” Have a nice life.

It seems you can not read, did you go to a public school in Chicago? I said, “The major problem with gun violence in the US is we have thugs breeding a new generation of thugs. We need to get to the root of the problem by returning to our Judeo/Christian family values, not restricting guns.”

Barbarian notes the evidence:
So there aren’t that many shootings in the public schools after all?

Imagine that. Do you suppose that the lack of guns in the schools and the ready availability of guns elsewhere, might have something to do with it?

And you’re arguing the lack of shootings in public schools isn’t due to a lack of guns, but rather because there are no thugs in public schools? Do you have some evidence for that?

It seems you can not read, did you go to a public school in Chicago?

So you’re arguing that there are very, very few shootings in Chicago public schools because I didn’t attend there? Why not just admit that the lack of guns causes a scarcity of shootings?

I said, “The major problem with gun violence in the US is we have thugs breeding a new generation of thugs. We need to get to the root of the problem by returning to our Judeo/Christian family values, not restricting guns.”

I pointed out that the rarity of shootings in public schools is because they don’t allow weapons there. You took issue with that. You picked Chicago, BTW. I gather you now understand?

Of couse a lack of guns causes a lack of shootings. It is extreamly difficult to shoot someone without a gun. That is like saying a lack of food causes hunger. What you cannot show is that a more gun laws will reduce the number of guns on the street. What do you want to do search every person on the street like they do in the Chicago schools? Right now you are not allowed to have a weapon on the streets of Chicago. Do you think more gun laws will reduce the number of gang killings? I was trying to say that the kids just wait until they are out of school get their gun and shoot the guy they were after. I admit I did a poor job of it.

(Barbarian suggests the lack of school violence is a consequence of keeping guns out of them)

Of couse a lack of guns causes a lack of shootings.

Good thinking. It’s why they keep them out of schools.

What you cannot show is that a more gun laws will reduce the number of guns on the street.

Don’t remember arguing that they would. Or are you talking to yourself?

As a kid we were allowed to take guns to school. It was not only legal, it was OK with the school too.

Explain please how there are now school shooting but there were not then?

As a kid we were allowed to take guns to school. It was not only legal, it was OK with the school too.

Explain please how there are now school shooting but there were not then?

The evidence I have, shows that per-school shootings have declined in recent decades. Department of Justice says that it’s down. We were a more violent society a few decades ago.

I have to say that I grew up in a rural area where hunting was pretty much a universal pastime for males, and they didn’t allow kids to bring guns to school. Where did you grow up?

Northern Indiana, near Chicago, in the early 1960’s. Back when you could buy guns without any paperwork. When hardware stores sold guns. When gun free zones did not exist. Despite the easy access to guns and you could buy them at department stores (Sears, Montgomery Ward, etc) there were few mass shootings.

Barbarian observes:
I have to say that I grew up in a rural area where hunting was pretty much a universal pastime for males, and they didn’t allow kids to bring guns to school. Where did you grow up?

Northern Indiana, near Chicago, in the early 1960’s.

A quick look shows no such thing, although maybe urban schools were different. You brought guns to school? What for?

Back when you could buy guns without any paperwork. When hardware stores sold guns. When gun free zones did not exist. Despite the easy access to guns and you could buy them at department stores (Sears, Montgomery Ward, etc)

Irrelevant to the issue. What do you have to show us that public schools permitted kids to have guns on campus?

there were few mass shootings.

In the last three or four decades, the rate has been about 0.00001 per school per year. How many were there back in the 60s? I didn’t know they kept statistics on school violence that far back.

“show & tell”

Ah, where I lived, that would be like bring a sock to school for show and tell. Everybody knew what guns were like.

But they really let you bring a gun into class to show the class?

Yes. The rule was the firing pin had to be removed. It was no big deal.

So, it was OK to bring a gun to school, so long as it couldn’t be used. Sounds OK.

Yes, but you could posses the firing pin. So the firing pin, which on some guns takes only a moment or two to install, could be carried with the gun. It just could not be in the gun. I don’t know anyone who violated the policy. And that was long before “gun free zones” existed in schools.

Still, this thread shows the folly of the GUN FREE ZONE signs. Obviously only people honest enough to follow rules follow those signs. Criminals, like the one in the first post of this thread, ignore the pieces of paper. Consequently these things serve no real purpose.

Still, this thread shows the folly of the GUN FREE ZONE signs.

We will know about that when you substantiate your claim that all those places were posted “gun-free zones.” When do you think you’ll be able to do that?

How many actual gun-free zones have had mass killings so far?

Isn’t that an important indicator right there?

Obviously only people honest enough to follow rules follow those signs. Criminals, like the one in the first post of this thread, ignore the pieces of paper. Consequently these things serve no real purpose.

Opinion is just opinion. When are you going to show us the requested evidence?

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315563,00.html

The article below, if you follow the link above, has several links to research and supporting data. The article is much longer than the selected paragraphs below, but these sentences convey the message.
Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall’s Gun-Free-Zone Status
[INDENT]The horrible tragedy at the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Neb. received a lot of attention Wednesday and Thursday. It should have. Eight people were killed, and five were wounded.

But despite the massive news coverage, none of the media coverage, at least by 10 a.m. Thursday, mentioned this central fact: Yet another attack occurred in a gun-free zone.

All these attacks — indeed, all attacks involving more than a small number of people being killed — happened in gun-free zones.

In recent years, similar attacks have occurred across the world, including in Australia, France, Germany and Britain. Do all these countries lack enough gun-control laws? Hardly. The reverse is more accurate.

The law-abiding, not criminals, are obeying the rules. Disarming the victims simply means that the killers have less to fear. As Wednesday’s attack demonstrated yet again, police are important, but they almost always arrive at the crime scene after the crime has occurred.[/INDENT]

Do I misunderstand you? Are you saying that Northern Indiana, in the early 1960’s was not near Chicago? When did they move it?

Do I misunderstand you?

Why would I be different than anything else? Of course you misunderstood.

Are you saying that Northern Indiana, in the early 1960’s was not near Chicago?

No. Read it again, minus your edit.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.