Murder - Suicide in Connecticut

[mikeb302000]

Boston.com reports

The fatal shootings of a man and woman in Simsbury are being treated as a murder-suicide.

Police say they responded to the Meadows apartment complex on Route 10 just before 8:30 p.m. Wednesday after a woman called authorities to say her boyfriend was pointing a gun at her and threatening to kill her and himself.

A dispatcher then heard gunshots over the phone.

Officers found the woman and man dead and a toddler who wasn’t injured.

Every single day we read about people misusing guns who shouldn't have them in the first place. Often it's men abusing women. The pro-gun crowd would love us to accept that there's no way to prevent this from happening, but that's just not the case.

Many of these people have had incidents in their lives which, if strict qualifications for gun ownership had been in effect, would have disqualified them. Gun-rights people don't want that.

My ideas would remove guns from dangerous people at the first indication that they're dangerous, not after they end up killing someone. This maintenance combined with proper gun control laws would lead to a safer society.

Why would anyone oppose that? Everyone would benefit, even the irresponsible ones.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Cross posted at Mikeb302000

[former-republican]

1. Why not apply the same to motor vehicle violations

More deaths happen on highways than anywhere else

One speeding ticket you lose your privilege to drive for life.



See how that works ,that's why you're wrong every time when you offer your opinion in this group forum.

[rl6214]

3. But, but but...gunz are ment to kill donchaknow

Cars aren't meant to kill, even though they do. I guess that must mean cars are defective cuz they are doing stuff they aren't suppose to do and guns are ok because they do exactly what they are supposed to do.

[former-republican]

5. That's funny

[mikeb302000]

18. You're the one with difficulty explaining your point

that's why you have to resort to comparisons that don't really work.

If cars were regulated as loosely as guns, we'd have about 200,000 deaths per year on the road. If guns were regulated as much as cars, we'd have less than 5,000 gun deaths a year.

So, your comparison makes no sense, especially since you only resort to it because you can't win the argument straight up.

[gejohnston]

24. gun are actually regulated stricter than cars

when you look at the whole picture. Tom DeLay can legally own and drive a car, and legally buy one in any state. Having a gun would send him back to prison.

[mikeb302000]

33. When we have licensing, registration and insurance requirements for guns

you can argue that. Until then you're just talking bullshit.

[beevul]

35. When we have licensing, registration and insurance requirements...

When we have licensing, registration and insurance requirements...For car OWNERSHIP, rather than public usage, you'll have a point.

Where in the US are those things required for car OWNERSHIP?

[mikeb302000]

42. Oh, yeah, I forgot about the high percentage of folks who only drive on their own property. n.t.

[beevul]

46. Red herring.

One can own planes, trains, busses, trucks, and even locomotives.

One is NOT required in any general sense, to be licensed, registered, or have insurance, to simply OWN those things.

You're conflating OWNERSHIP of guns, with usage in public of the things that licensing, registration and insurance requirements actually apply to ONLY when used in public, and you were hoping nobody would notice.

And you got nothing on that.

Just admit it.

[rl6214]

2. Oh no, someone did something bad with a gun...

BAN EM...BAN EM ALL...

Blind links to your blog I mean, that's what needs to be banned.

[gejohnston]

4. none of your ideas actually addresses the issue

BTW,
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.it/2012/02/guns-and-women.html
What that chart shows, never mind Hemenway's claims, that rural areas have higher suicide rates and depression than urban areas. That is equally true in "awash in guns" rural US and Canada as it is in gun free rural Japan and South Korea. Now compare Wyoming's murder rate with New York or Florida........

Can you show an example of your "proper gun control laws" actually doing anything? MA has all of those "proper gun laws" did this guy have a license for this gun?

The only thing California's AWB did was cause problems for the Olympic pistol team.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117269932

http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/domviolence.htm
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content//homicide/intimates.cfm#intweap

[mikeb302000]

19. An isolated example of gun control cannot work

You'd need a wall around the place and passport control. Besides, not MA and not the city of Chicago has the kind of proper gun control that I would like.

[gejohnston]

25. not an isolated case at all

USVI is another example, it is between MA and Chicago in terms of gun laws. It has an astronomical murder rate, but neighboring BVI does not.

I lean closer to to Vermont or the Czech Republic.

[holdencaufield]

6. Welcome to the Daily Blog Flog ...

[veganlush]

7. guns should be for women only

Or not at all

[PavePusher]

14. Please expound on this, I'd like to know why you believe it. n/t

[mikeb302000]

20. Go visit my blog if you're interested

I expound on it every day.

[Berserker]

8. Proper gun control laws

will not now or ever lead to a safer society. The story you posted did not happen because of a gun it happened because of mental illness. Why would you spend so much of your energy posting stories like this then blame it on guns? You will not change the Bill of rights and you will not take away our guns. It may help you feel like you are changing minds and doing something to help but you are not. You keep pounding away at gun rights people can't you see what the problem really is? This person could have killed his girlfriend with a hammer and then hung himself in the barn what would you have posted then? Not a damn thing but the end result was the same only the tools used were different. Would you then go after hammer and rope control? No you would realize that the problem runs deeper than what tools where used. You would then think about mental illness and how big of a problem it is in our society.

[glacierbay]

12. This guy lives in Italy, works for the UN

and, according to him, has in the past, illegally had guns. IMHO, he has no credibility at all and no say in our gun laws even though he is still an american citizen, and his little blog is a joke, I made the mistake of going there the other day and came away feeling like I needed a shower after reading some of the anti gun comments.

[mikeb302000]

21. I don't blame the gun

I blame gun availability, and then only partly. You're right, the problem is mental illness, so what do you suggest, we make gun availability easy for those lunatics?

[ileus]

9. Only I should be allowed 2A freedom.

[holdencaufield]

11. 2A Rights aren't for everyone

They should only be for celebrities, member of congress, atheists and those liberals who rightly fear the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

Guns for me, but not for thee.

[Atypical Liberal]

10. And yet violent crime continues to decline.

Every single day we read about people misusing guns who shouldn't have them in the first place.

And yet violent crime continues its decades-long decline.

My ideas would remove guns from dangerous people at the first indication that they're dangerous, not after they end up killing someone. This maintenance combined with proper gun control laws would lead to a safer society.

Since I refuse to click on your blog, what ideas do you have? And what are "proper gun control laws" to your mind?

[glacierbay]

13. Whatever you do

don't click on his little blog, it's a joke.

[PavePusher]

15. Oh, we know.

And it's a bad joke.

[mikeb302000]

22. You should get over your silly refusal to visit my blog.

You might learn something. Get out of your echo chamber, man. Open your mind. What are you afraid of?

[gejohnston]

26. if you actually researched

and improved your writing skills, maybe we could.

[Reasonable_Argument]

28. Why?

What background do you have regarding gun rights that would compel me to visit your blog? When I want to read people's general opinions I come to sites like this. Stop begging.

[Atypical Liberal]

31. Nope, I'm not going to reward your efforts with traffic.

If you wish to educate me, you'll have to post here.

[rrneck]

32. Okay, that was funny.

Pathetic, obtuse, needy, blatantly self promotional, and hopelessly narcissistic, but funny.

[MicaelS]

41. I'm not going to visit your crappy little blog..

Thus driving traffic to your website, and possibly putting money in your pocket through advertising.

You have something to say, say it here.

[mikeb302000]

43. Oh, yeah, driving all that traffic from this DU thread.

Fuck, I'd be a millionaire if only you mean boys would cooperate with my plan.

[Eleanors38]

16. Men abusing women? Explains big jump in women applying for ccw, no? Nt

[mikeb302000]

23. The big jump is bullshit propaganda.

As the Godfather of Soul said, this is a man's world.

[Eleanors38]

29. Gallup spreading propaganda? Check the figures.

"but it wouldnt be nothing without a woman or a girl."

[GreenStormCloud]

17. Violent criminals often abuse women.

Most gun misuse is by violent criminals who are already forbidden to own guns. That is no reason to take my guns away from me.

[aikoaiko]

27. I'd be interesting in reading your ideas but I don't want to click on a blind link.

Why not post your ideas here?

[oneshooter]

30. Because then he would not be able to pimp his blog. n/t

[mikeb302000]

34. Well, actually I do.

I do post my ideas here, but naturally there's more over at my blog.

You guys love to repeat each others' insults and accusations even if they make no sense. You seem to be saying I post NOTHING at all here EXCEPT links to by blog. That's not the case. But, when one of you says that, the others start repeating it like silly sycophants, like adolescent babies.

Grow the fuck up and stick to the argument instead of all the personal attacks.

[beevul]

36. Hows the weather in Italy lately? N/T

[aikoaiko]

37. I prefer not to click on blind links to suspect websites

Since this blog is contains your words you can reproduce the blog entry in your post in its entirety without copyright concerns.

Or if youve posted these ideas on DU before perhaps you can link to the DU post.

Either way there's no need to get huffy and call my request to post your ideas directly in DU (instead of blind linking to some other website) a personal attack.

I find it odd that you would consider it a personal attack to have some ask for more information.

[mikeb302000]

44. Well, let's see, the topic was something about guns

and all you're writing about is my way of linking to my blog.

[aikoaiko]

45. I asked for you to post your ideas ABOUT GUN POLICY in the forum.

Is there some reason why you are reluctant to do so? Surely, you're not trying to drive web traffic to a blog site in which you have a vested interest.

Surely, you wish to engage in discussion at DU?

[oneshooter]

38. Well you really told me, didn't you. Pimp your blog all you want.

If what you write here is any indication of your blog, then I have no need to visit it.

Yes you printed one idea, it was so utterly destroyed that it took you a long time to come crawling back.

Print some more of your, mainly illegal, ideas on gun control.

I could use the laugh!

[4th law of robotics]

40. If you drop your gun you should permanently lose your rights

if you have a negligent discharge if it is stored properly if you brandish or lose it and if you take it to an airport.

All those things mean you lose your 2nd amendment rights forever. (the terms are of course never defined. Stored properly no doubt means in pieces in 12 different safes each submerged in different bodies of water).

Of course it ignores the fact that this doesn't really do anything (how many people would that actually stop?) and it punishes people arbitrarily (there's the safe storage and brandishing thing, both are entirely subjective and then you're penalized if you have some of your property stolen).

[4th law of robotics]

39. I read your laws and they strike me as a the same as the people pushing psych evals

after the Aurora shooting.

Great and all exact that it would have done nothing to prevent that exact scenario they were waving around to push their new restrictions.

Do you have any proof that this guy brought his gun to an airport prior to this? Or dropped his gun?