Like hell it doesn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre#Firearms

Thank God Obama finally came out and clarified he is for the individual right to bear arms, just like the NRA.

Now that in Florida employees can bring their guns into the workpace, the crime rate will go down, because, as we know, everywhere you have tons of guns all over the place, have have low crime rates. Like the old Tame, Tame West. And like downtown Miami, Chicago, Houston, Baltimore today.

Every nation with national gun control? Horribly unsafe, crime everywhere, people afraid to walk around at night. Like Tokyo, Ottowa, Madrid, Sydney. Awful, awful rivers of violence there.

Can't wait for Obama to take next logical step: "arms" includes tanks and nukes! So with every citizen able to have a tank or nukes, we will be so much safer.
It's "arms" in that amendment, isn't it? Not just "rifles" or "guns" or "numchuks" but "arms" -- everything you make war with. So Florida employers: don't you create any work rules saying employees can't bring nukes onto your property either!

The gun show loophole is a bunch of malarkey. There is no gun show loophole. Go to a gun show, try to buy a gun without having a background check. It doesn't happen. You cannot buy from a dealer without a federal background check. Period. No dealer risks it because they would lose their livelihood. It's not a minor thing like a bar selling to a minor, it's a federal felony.

When are people going to realize that it's not guns that are the problem, it's crazy people. Crazy people do crazy things, it's not like guns magically make them kill people.

If someone had had a concealed carry license and was carrying in that Virginia classroom, maybe there would have only been one person shot.

Do a ride along with the Seattle PD sometime and ask them what they think about people being able to carry guns here. They, you know the guys who actually deal with crime, believe that the crime rate is lower because of the ability of our populace to carry guns.

Australia and England have actually had rises in crime after banning firearms.

Criminals are not stupid. If they know you're likely to have a gun, they'll chose to attack someone they don't think has one.

Also, your argument that more guns = more crime is complete casuistry. The one place you're least likely to get shot is a gun show, the place with the most guns.

Yes, if more people had guns there, it would have been safer. Do you think it got less safe when the cops showed up with guns?

Believe me, I've shot with cops before and your average person who carries a gun shoots better than they do and practices more.

If you were in that room, would you have wanted to sit there and let him shoot you, or would you have wanted to be able to fire back and stop him?

Yes, but exercising your freedom of speech can still get you fired.

And I'm actually finding that picture of what's-his-face kind of funny. Ooh, I'm so intimidated by the sight of him holding a gun to his own head. It reminds me of the scene in Blazing Saddles when Bart holds himself hostage.

so legal gun owners should be allowed to carry their firearms into classrooms...unless, of course, they're CRAZY legal gun owners like the VT shooter.

How do you suggest we tell them apart?

A BBC report about the spike in gun crime post gun ban:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm

Crime in Australia up after guns banned:
http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html

That second link isn't as conclusive as the first, but the information is out there if you want to be educated.

One of the main problems with this debate is that people debate on emotion, not fact. There are facts out there and they're pretty clear that legislating guns away doesn't do anything to stop gun crime, and most of the time makes it worse.

Phew! I feel safer just thinking about it!

Yeah, I'm sure that manufacturers will stop supplying wars around the world and military groups, and I'm sure that organized crime and and regular criminals will stop trying to get guns.

Of course if by some miracle guns are completely removed from civilians, then people will have to fight tyranny and oppressive governments or police forces with sticks and rocks and stuff.

Not to mention that removing guns won't remove violent crime. Husbands will still beat wives, big people will still beat up on small people, parents will still beat on kids. There will still be muggings and mass killings, they just won't be with guns, they'll be with knives, swords, sticks, bombs, fists and other weapons.

Also, counting on guns to just wear out is a fools bargain. There are tons of working guns from revolutionary times on up.

I don't know why you don't get it. The problem isn't guns, its whatever is in people that makes them want to hurt other people. You can't just legislate that away.

What I think so many people are missing in the whole discussion on mass shootings, etc, is the role pharmaceuticals play. It seems like all these shoots are done by young people, and they are all on some sort of anti-depressant or ADD drug or similar. But because drug companies pay for most of our news, that is never discussed.

Lastly, I suspect that most of the people who would prefer to be armed in public places are Barney Fifes who would make your average mass shooting into a circular firing squad.