So they admit this gun control bill would not have stopped the Sandy Hook shooting? So why spend every waking?
Joe Manchin (D-WV) admits his gun control bill would not have stopped what happened at Sandy Hook: http://bit.ly/129CyBF
Connecticut had the 5th most stringent gun control laws in the nation when Adam Lanza committed his crime. These included background checks and an "assault weapons" ban.
Why are they still using it as a political prop?
Colony- This is a debate forum. Where do you see the hate in this question?
- KilroyLv 48 years agoFavorite Answer
It is precisely this reasoning that makes me despise Obama's use of the Sandy Hook families. The particular actions they are seeking to take would never have stopped Sandy Hook, so they shouldn't use Sandy Hook victims as leverage.
Not to mention the fact that it's disrespectful: let the poor children rest in peace. It's like using a pretty woman to sell a car. They deserve better than that.
If they really wanted to prevent things like Sandy Hook from happening, they would attack the heart of the problem: mental health and psychiatric medications. Both James Holmes and Adam Lanza were on psychiatric pills that had violent side effects.
They won't focus on this, the real problem, because Sandy Hook was beneficial to their political agenda. It's helping them push irrational gun laws that wouldn't go through otherwise.
- Anonymous4 years ago
There are some regulations that choose progression. in spite of each and every thing we've been warned appropriate to the hazards of "gun unfastened zones" considering the fact that a minimum of 2007. it is been an prolonged, unnecessarily confusing, bloody and painful street despite the fact that curiously like we've finally discovered that lesson. additionally, curiously like this could desire to be a handbook for psychological wellbeing care -- while a mom has made a confusing determination and is attempting to have her son committed there is a few thing that needs to be investigated assessed and acted upon rapidly if there's a valid reason. we are in a position to 2nd wager her all day and hindsight does not make it no longer basic to declare "could desire to haves" yet despite - we ought to income a lesson right here.
- 8 years ago
If a criminal wants to get a gun, he can get a gun regardless of laws. It is the good citizen who is hurt by gun control. It is shown that there is a higher violent crime rate in areas with stricter gun laws in the u.s. why do you think schools are common places for big shootings, no guns for people to defend themselves with, having guns locked in schools would do more than needing to get buzzed in. Politicians jumped the gun (no pun intended) on gun restrictions and laws. They did so to try to bring closure and look good, the did not take the time to think of better ways to reduce gun violence without harming the good citizens and restricting our second admendment.
- Anonymous8 years ago
It's not about gun control, it's about people control
Sandy Hook is just something for Democrats to exploit
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- kelby7670Lv 78 years ago
Gun control laws outlaw bazookas. I have never heard of anyone being shot with a bazooka. Therefore gun control laws work.
- GolferLv 78 years ago
It is all about control, a person commit multi killing and then we are to feel sorry for him/her?
The more we as honest citizens are attacked the more the left want to take away our guns---WHY?
- Jeff SLv 78 years ago
Simple fact is that all these guns are coming from somewhere!
Most likely the 'black market' is being supplied from somewhere.That somewhere is probably from 'legitimate' sources selling to straw men!
- Really?Lv 78 years ago
Well it is evident the board troll is not an American
- Anonymous8 years ago
Ive decided. I don't like Republicans. Look at this board. All full of hatred.