Shootings and Deaths

When it happened
Where it happenHow many deaths/Injuries


6 December 2007
Nebraska
9 deaths(including the shooter who killed himself)
9 December 2007
Colorado
5 deaths(including himself)
12 December 2007
Las Vegas, Nevada
6 injuries no deaths
2 February 2008
Chicago, Illinois
5 deaths
5 February 2008
COCKEYSVILLE, Maryland4 dead (shooter's 2 parents and 2 brothers)
7 February 2008
San Fernando Valley, California
4 deaths (including a SWAT officer, 2 injuries
7 February 2008Kirkwood, Missouri 6 dead (including the shooter who was shot by police), 2 injuries
7 February 2008Baton Rouge, Louisiana 3 dead (including the shooter who shot herself)
14 February 2008Northern Illinois University's DeKalb 6 dead (including the shooter), 16 injuries
27 February 2008Los Angeles7 injuries
3 March 2008Florida2deaths (including the gunman who shot himself) and 5 injuries
3 March 2008Memphis, Tennessee6 deaths 3 injuries
29 July 2008Knoxville, Tennessee2 deaths and 7 injuries
9 Oct 2008Knoxville, Tennessee1 deaths, and gunman injured

Sunday, January 13, 2008

New Gun Control Regulations for 2008??

With President Bush throwing his support behind the newest Gun Control regulations, its almost enough to think twice about supporting it. Yet, when examined, its pretty amazing that these regulations weren't in practice already. From restrictions on individual ownership of machine guns to prohibiting felons, the mentally ill, and those with restraining orders against them from owning guns, these regulations sound more like common sense rather than radical and new. Still, those against the regulations state that the administration is against individual rights. Sadly, they are probably correct but without actually knowing the intentions of the White House, we can almost assuredly say their motives are suspect if nothing else.

Even with motives that are suspect, i can not see why these regulations aren't being met with dancing in the street. It was only a month ago that there were mass shootings in the states. If December is any sort of example, than it should be clear that when people decide to kill, they aren't getting just one or two deaths in. They are going for as many fatalities as possible. Limiting what sort of fire arms that are available and who they are available to, seems like a great way to prevent these sorts of deaths.

So i am most surprised to find that few in the states seem to be happy about these measures. (Or maybe no one is talking about their support of gun control.) I somehow thought that all these mass deaths related to gun violence would somehow impact the USA in a much bigger way. Yet, in reality it seems that not enough people have died to justify these extreme measures in Gun Control.

If a plane is hijacked and flown into a building, its worth restricting public rights in order to keep more people safe. If a gun is bought and used to open fire in a public place, people feel that they're lives are not at risk, even though the latter scenario is much more common than the former. I am not sure what makes people so sure that it won't happen to them.

If prying the gun out of a gunman's cold dead hand is the only way to limit gun use, than the only way gun violence will drop is by having fewer people around to shoot.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

why is it that no one sees that gun restriction only works to stop Lawful citizens from protecting them selves

kris said...

There are lots of ways lawful citizens can protect themselves. One of those ways is by making sure guns are not accessible to people. Brain power is a powerful weapon against crimes and criminals