Finland mourns dead students, rethinks law

The shooting deaths of students are tragic. However, Finlands crime rates are low BECAUSE of private ownership of guns. This is obviously something that hardly occurs. If people did not have guns, Finland would see a rise in crime almost immediately. THere has been study after study that shows an armed populace has less crime. In other words, "an armed society is a polite society". There are always going to be those whack jobs who will do horrible things with or without laws banning guns. I always find it amazing that people think the solution to solving crime is taking the means of defense away from LAW ABIDING citizens when the criminals will get their weapons regardless. Then you are left defenseless and dependent upon police who may or may not show up on time. Irrational reactions by politicians can mess things up for everyone.

here's one such study: "Firearms and Crime" by Daniel D. Polsby (a law professor at Northwestern University)

it's not a far stretch to see where gun bans can end up- look at history. the most disturbing thought is not the idea of banning dangerous weapons to keep them out of the hands of dangerous people, but where things can go from there. once one type of firearm is banned, it follows that other types will be added until no one is even allowed to own a bb gun. i don't know what finnish society is like, but with a long standing history of hunting, i'd guess that taking their guns away would be about as successful as it would be here, with a whole lot of "cold, dead hands" being pried open.

Go Bucks!

A typical response by a politician (the Prime Minister) was to ban all handguns. Punish honest citizens for the actions of a crazed idiot. As other commenters have said, their crime rate would go up and all the people would suffer. The Prime Minister should provide armed guards at every public building or allow concealed carry by licensed citizens. Banning handguns is a grandstand move by a typical politician and as always, provide no safety, just more deaths.

Better ban Matches too so they dont start fires !!

as we all know, the problem lies not with the firearms, but with who owns them. i am a gun owner (even handguns) and have been for a number of years, and i've never committed a crime with them. does that mean that everyone should be allowed to buy one? no, of course not, and it therefore does not follow that just because one person violates the law with a handgun, no one should be allowed to purchase them.

the only real gun control is a 1" group.

The punishment for every crime that involves using a gun is more severe than that of the crime of owning an illegal firearm or carrying illegally; therefore, gun bans don't stop anyone from committing such crimes. They've already gone past the point of fearing lesser ordinances. Someone who will burn down a house isn't afraid to light a match. Besides, a gun-free society (hard to achieve without Orwellian dystopia) just means lots of knife crimes by emboldened criminals who know their victims are disarmed. Look at the UK. Let's just call laws that disarm law-abiding citizens they are, workplace safety programs for violent criminals.

The NRA and others has promoted this position for so long that guns are literally everywhere. Any child can get one with a little effort. Witness the school shootings. If the parents won't provide the guns, some other criminal will. Is it too late to try to stem the tide? Can we only jump on the sinking ship and arm ourselves, legally or otherwise? Have we have regressed to a caveman mentality? The media (and NRA) certainly indicates that is the case.

I don't think it necessarily follows that it is impossible to severely limit the availability, production and spread of certan classes of firearms that are easily concealed and that can wreak mass havoc. Severe penalties for the sale, possession, and abuse of these weapons will have an effect. Use a gun in a crime - automatic extended sentence, not a slap on the wrist. It is feasible, but probably not politically possible as long as the NRA mentality rules.

(US Army Retired; Vietnam veteran; Lifelong hunter)

Why do the media not cry out to ban cars when there are more people killed with cars than guns. Why do the media not cry to ban ladders when there are more people killed falling off ladders than by guns. Why do the media not cry out to ban homes when there are more people killed by falling inside their homes than with guns.

I think my point is that guns are far down the list of things that kill. They are , however, far UP the list of things that protect.

My question to all those that think gun bans will stop crime is;
Have the drug laws stopped the sale of illegal drugs?
New laws will only create new black markets. Better education will confront accidents, better control of handguns in the home will confront children finding them. Quick access safes that are fingerprint coded help solve that problem.

wow, your little off there Bluto. The NRA pushes quite hard to be tougher on criminals esspecially those stupid enough to use a firearm. They have even backed legislation to restrict access of firearms to released criminals.

Who has a caveman mentality? The guy protecting his family from a crazed murderer or guy trying to murder them? I'm a bit confused there. Can you clear that up?

Good thing we don't ban money because banks get robbed!

Remember prohibition, did that stop drinking.

Do underage kids smoke?

Do folks still obtain illegal drugs that are banned?

Do you go after the hand gun or the idiot using it?

Will the idiot find something else to use?

Will the hand gun find something else to use?

All people who commit crimes with weapons are crossing their their fingers and legs to keep from peeing themselves from laughing so hard.

I'm glad to see the majority here are thinking people. One big problem that people like Bluto don't get, is that there ARE strict laws that punish criminals when they use an illegal firearm in a crime. The problem is that at that point, it's too late for the victim. However satisfying it may be for you to lock someone up for life, the damage is done. Where the law needs to be hard and strictly enforced is for the illegal possession, sale or transfer of a gun. Our laws make no sense. Why the hell is it less of a crime for attempted murder than it is if the victim dies??? What sense does that make? The intent was the same. These same whiners who cry over legal gun ownership are the ones who complain that everyone needs a second or third or fourth chance when they commit serious crimes.

StoneCold "...if a criminal is going to flout the laws concerning murder, rape, robbery, etc., do you really think he is going to obey gun control restrictions"?

Exactly!

You and I get it, why can't others see the logic?

It's the mind set of the perp... not the method of delivery!

Duh!

I'm sure no one will accept this as a good comparison, but when I was in Vietnam ('70) I was ridiculed because I didn't smoke. Everyone smoked - it was almost mandatory. When I later became employed in the civilian world (late 80's), there was actually a requirement that all desks in the building be provided with an ashtray. Who would have imagined at that time that smoking would ever be virtually banned in public?

Bluto II... it is a good comparison and would probably come true if it weren't for the fact our constitution says different.

I'm sure you are all correct, and you've worn me down, so I'll quit for now. I never said it will happen, but just that it is possible with the proper amount of determination. I suppose that I'm insulated from "reality". I live in a little place where we all know our neighbors, and mostly feel no need to beat each other up. I wish more people could find some peace. God help us all.

Bluto, it's great you live in a "little place" where everybody gets along. So do I. But what's to stop outsiders from coming in and trying to take what you & your neighbors have earned? And I think that possibility becomes more and more likely as this society slides further down the tubes.

That said, I commend you on your position - even though I don't agree with it. You're the FIRST anti-gun person I've encountered on here that submits rational ideas, rather than emotional rhetoric and name-calling, which is generally the best the anti-gun liberals can come up with. I respect your position, and sincerely hope you don't have to pay for it one day.

Here are the FBI Crime statistics for 2007. Bluto II needs to read this carefully.

FBI's Crime Report Bad News for Anti-Gunners

Friday, September 19, 2008

This week, the FBI released its crime report for 2007 and, once again, gun control supporters are taking it on the chin.

It's not just that the nation's violent crime rate decreased slightly between 2006 and 2007. It's that every year since 2002 it has been lower than anytime since 1974, leading the Justice Department to say that violent crime is "near a 30-year low." Since 1991, violent crime has dropped 38 percent. Murder is now at a 40-year low, lower than anytime since 1966 every year from 1999 to the present, and down 43 percent since 1991.

"More guns means more crime?" WRONG! Violent crime has fallen as the number of guns has increased 4.5 million a year. There are more gun owners, owning more guns than ever before, and violent crime is lower than anytime since Gerald Ford became president!

We can hardly wait to see the Brady Campaign try to spin this one with its asinine "state grades" stunt. In 2007, the major U.S. cities with the highest murder rates were cities with severe gun control. The top three? Detroit (where Michigan law requires a permit to purchase a handgun), Baltimore (where Maryland law restricts private handgun sales and requires a seven-day waiting period on handgun sales by dealers), and the District of Columbia (with its handgun ban and its firearm registration law). Detroit, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and D.C. had the highest robbery rates.

In 2007, as in years past, Right-to-Carry states had lower violent crime rates, on average, compared to the rest of the country with total violent crime lower by 24 percent, murder by 28 percent, robbery by 50 percent, and aggravated assault by 11 percent. Further, in 2007, 32 percent of murders were committed without firearms of any sort--knives accounted for 12 percent, hands and feet six percent, and blunt objects four percent. Rifles and shotguns (semi-automatic and otherwise) accounted for three percent each, and typically "assault weapons" have accounted for about one percent.

The problem is not the problem.....(hint:its not guns)
How are the pharma companies keeping the one and only one variable that is the same with all the school shootings....psychiatric medications.....It takes months to get those out of the system. Mess with the brain, never the same.

Earlier unhappy youth just did themselves in, now with the unusual side effects to anti depressants...they have this strange "world-life hate" which makes them plan on taking more lives.

I am not making this up, we dealt with the side effects of anti depressants with our son and have done lots of research about it. I personally see a "temporal lobe" alteration in many of the reports. With the temporal lobe you either go in a "heaven" or a "hell" experience. Of course what percentage gets the awful side effect? Not high enough for pharmaceuticals to care, its big business with Billions of dollars in profits.

Wow!

Gun Banning to stop gun crime...what a concept!!! That has never been tried before! Look at Washington D.C. (BTW thank you to the Supreme court) and Chicago, both gun ban cities and both crime ridden rat holes (I grew up in Chicago). As a law enforcement officer an I can assure you gun bans DO NOT WORK, it only succeeds in disarming the innocent.

Here is the solution to crime. Quit giving criminals so many chances, break the law and you go to jail. Make jail an extremely unpleasant place, cold in winter, no A/C in summer and hard labor 8 hours a day. Refuse to work and you get bread and water until you work.

In nut shell, quit treating criminals like they are patents needing treatment and like criminals that need to be punished and treated so severely they never want to be treated like that again.

Side note: For a criminal to actually be prosecuted they have done something so egregious the prosecutors can not longer ignore it. Criminals get free passes on crimes all the time because there are not enough resources to prosecute them all. The prosecutors are forced to prioritize crimes. Think of it this way how many times have you gotten away with speeding and not received a ticket?

Purchase a gun, learn how to use it and keep it safely in your home for protection against criminals.

As I have gotten older I have been able to control myself when I read these stories of "Gun Banning" in the face of some terrible tragedy, when it is so obvious the way to go is the opposite direction. In a room full of students no one had the means to put this guy down before the full extent of his damaging intent could be realized. SHAMEFUL!
As for Bluto, I too grew up in a "little place where everyone knew each other". Everyone owned weapons because everyone hunted. No one ever brought one to school, they would have been pummeled for being a moron. My point here is the entire populace had exposure to weapons, could have done dastardly deeds at any time, and chose not to. They were not forced into compliant behavior what with our one part time police officer. The entire group was not programmed to fear weapons and so any behavior with a weapon that was not in line with what the entire group knew to be proper would be met with stiff retribution.
Fast forward 20 years, I live in a larger city and it stinks, it is noisy, it is crime riddled. Drugs, theft, violence, all daily occurences. No one really knows anyone, all distrust the other. We all have one thing in common, a criminal intent on doing wrong has the ability to operate outside conventional practice. We live in a state of conventional practice, the difference is not easily distinguished by everyone.
So it happened one night as I was driving my new SUV home from some friends, a car pulled up right on my rear bumper and another sped around and breaked hard in front of me. Slowing me down and forcing me to the curb, all the while boxing me in. I thought rapidly to turn left, to escape, to get away. I thought to prepare myself for defensive action, I thought, I need a gun! At that point, there was no point wishing, I was unarmed and preparing to face at least one and possibly more, criminals intent on operating outside of conventional behavior. A vehicle came by and stopped in the street as the punk was running toward my door. It may have been fear of discovery, fear that this other driver was armed or just the "cockroach factor" but he turned and fled as did the vehicle in the back.
The following day I visited my local gunstore, urchased my first handgun and later that day applied for my license to carry a concealed weapon. The license arrived and I walked in and picked up my weapon, ammo, safe and holster. Next time, this story will end differently.

This being an election year I must include here, " I would support an outright ban on the manufacture, sale, posession or distribution of all handguns."Barack Obama, Illinois Senate floor.

Sweet dreams America

Woodja:
Amen...amen. Hopefully the rest of the country will wake up or all OUR stories will end differently.

Far as I'm concerned, neither McCain nor Obama are worth a fart in a hurricane. It's sad that a country that has produced the likes of Washington, Lincoln, and FDR can't do better than these two jabronis. But I will vote for McCain ONLY because I think my right to self-defense will be better preserved under a McCain administration. And as this country's issues become worse and worse, I'm going to need that right. As far as anything else (war, economy, etc.) goes, anybody that thinks anything will change once the election is over, no matter who wins, probably still believes in the Easter bunny.

The small town I grew up in everyone knew everyone else. Many of us were related to each other. Almost everyone owned firearms. Kids who hunted had their rifles in their pickups. They kept the windows down in the warmer months and no one ever bothered them. Society has changed since then and it has changed for the worse. I am a gun (arsenal) owner and have a carry permit. I am the first line of defense for myself and my family. The police are not legally obligated to protect you. They are to protect and serve the community at large, not the individual.
When it comes to gun crimes here is my opinion. It's not much and probably not the best but it's mine.
If you commit a crime (robbery) with a gun then it's 25 years with no parole.
If you use a gun to commit a rape then it is 50 years no parole.
If you unlawfully take a life (murder) with a gun then you visit Old Sparky. No exceptions.
No plea bargains, no 2 for 1 jail terms, no turning states evidence, no deals period.

I live in between Nashville, Knoxville and Chattanooga. I live in the mountains now where you can leave your doors unlocked at night and sleep peacefully. I have lived in cities where you lock your door just to walk to the mailbox, where gang members outnumbered the police. Where you put your mattress on the floor so when drive bys happened during the night you were less likely to be hit.
Just a couple of months ago in Nashville there was a report on the news where a 38 year old man was wanted for armed robbery. The anchors said he had 31 felony arrests. His record had everything from armed robbery, to rape, to murder. He has 7 charges that had not even been to court yet. Why is this guy still on the street? 31 felonies and he is walking around committing more. Something is wrong with our justice system. There are no deterrents to crime anymore. People know if they shoot someone or rob a store then they will only be in jail for a few months. Hell they won't even miss their favorite television shows, since they can have televisions and dvd players.
We need to take a stand and take our society back. Call your representatives and demand them to make and pass laws that will give harsh mandatory sentences to criminals. Threaten to vote out and DA that allows deals and plea bargains to violent criminals. Petition your states Justice Department to remove the 2 for 1 and 3 for 1 sentences. These sentences for the ones who might not know is, if you are arrested for every day you serve in jail the state writes either 2 or 3 days served. If you have a 30 year sentence you can be out in 10 years. If you have an 18 month sentence you can be completely free in 6-9 months. Yet the victims and their families have to serve a life sentence while the criminal is loose in just a few months.