Ross Frenett
: Woolwich Attack: Should We Expect a Violent Response?
Theo Randall
: Recipe for the Weekend: Minestrone Primavera
Zoe Armstrong
: Five Ways to Fake a Break and Avoid Parenting Burnout
Anne Speckhard
: Examining the Woolwich Murder of a British Soldier
Jody Thompson
: Polo: It's Not Just for the Posh, and It's a Chukka to Play
Another day, another school shooting. Suspected gunman Adam Lanza, is said to have shot dead 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as his mother and then, somewhat predictably, himself.
It's the third large-scale shooting in the US in 2012 - twelve people were killed in a cinema in Aurora, Colorado in July 2012 and six people were gunned down at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin in August.
The list of major gun attacks in the US, including the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007 when 32 people were shot dead, is disturbingly long.
Every time one of these tragedies happens, the US Government and media are outraged, mournful, and extremely vocal about introducing legislation to stop it from happening again, but nothing ever happens.
The second that there's any mention of a sensible crackdown on ownership and regulation of weapons, the gun evangelists point everyone towards their precious Second Amendment, which is clearly more important to them than slaughtered children.
Forming part of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution states:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".
Adopted in 1791, just a few years after the American War of Independence, the amendment was of its time - written to ensure that the American people could defend themselves against the British and any other enemies. It wasn't intended to enable a disgruntled, mentally unstable individual to legally buy guns with ease and kill with alacrity during times of peace.
Times change, and so too has the context of the original Amendment. Let's not forget that the Bill of Rights itself originally only applied to white men, with women, native Americans and African Americans left out of the party until Amendments further down the line.
I'm British and I live in the UK, so why do I even have an opinion on American gun control? Well, I have family on the other side of the pond and my brother is a naturalised American. I'd like to think that they live in a country where any murderous oaf can't just waltz into a Walmart and stock up on guns and ammunition. Sadly, that's not the case.
On one visit to the US, we did a National Rifle Association of America shooting course, so I have a qualification from the NRA stating that I know how to load and fire a semi-automatic handgun. Preposterous, I know, but true.
As the only Brits in the room, we were also the only ones who'd never fired a gun before. I was amazed that we were just able to walk in and handle a gun - no police record check or anything.
To be fair, the trainers were excellent, with a refreshingly responsible attitude to guns. As well as mocking their own organisation's quaint insistence on referring to guns euphemistically as "firearms", rather than "weapons", our instructor also told us that if any of us were thinking of getting a gun for home protection then that would be a extremely foolish.
"Get a Louisville Slugger instead", he said (that's a baseball bat, to the Brits). Making this training course mandatory for gun owners would certainly be a step in the right direction.
Anyway, what the hell do we know about gun massacres in the UK? Unfortunatley, a fair bit.
In 1987, when Michael Ryan used several legally owned guns to kill 16 people (including his mother) and injure a further 15 bystanders in the notorious Hungerford Massacre, the Government immediately took steps to change the law.
As a result, the Firearms Amendment Act 1988 banned ownership of semi-automatic rifles and restricted the use of shotguns with a capacity of more than three rounds.
In 1996, when gunman Thomas Hamilton went into a school in Dunblane, Scotland and shot dead 16 pupils and a teacher, the nation was outraged. Which is precisely why there was only minimal opposition when the Government took steps to implement the Firearms Amendment Act 1997, effectively banning private ownership of handguns in the UK.
As a result, we have a very low number of gun-related deaths on UK soil compared to the USA.
Speaking in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting, President Obama said: "Our hearts are broken" and added "We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics".
A strong statement, and no doubt that a visibly upset Obama was expressing genuine sentiment, but as a political statement of intent, they're just words.
I don't wish to seem opportunistic, but this latest tragedy provides an ideal chance for the debate on gun control to move forward. However, as things stand, it's highly unlikely that any significant changes to gun ownership laws will make it through Congress.
"Today is not the day to engage in a policy debate about gun control", said White House press secretary Jay Carney on the events at Sandy Hook. To which I say, yes it bloody well is.
Follow Libby Plummer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/libbyplummer
Also, banning guns makes creates violence because criminals are not afraid of any resistance - in the UK gun-related deaths doubled in 10 years since they banned handguns. So in UK these laws already cost more than 4000 lives. I pray we will not fall into the same trap
What an absurd world view. My freedom is found not through violence and not through weapons designed solely to kill and maim. My freedom is based on grown-up civilised institutions like the law and democracy. And my personal freedom is found through empowerment in positive and constructive ideals like education and the arts.
Why would anybody choose fear and death to proclaim their freedom?
Hear! Hear! If today is not the day, when the hell is?
Another point. I worked in Anaheim, and the shop I worked in had Illegals in it...handguns were traded weekly...take guns from the honest citizen and the criminal will have no trouble getting them. As for longer sentences..that has never worked, it only inspires more crimes.
Here is a legitimate address and possible solutions. Enjoy
.http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13358-four-ways-to-stop-gun-violence
Doesn't seem like the Militia in the USA is very well regulated if anybody can buy a gun without a background check at a gun show.
Just another example of Americans only following their beloved Constitution when it suits them.
But what is preposterous about that? It's people who make lunatics, not guns. I would say that guns are so rooted in the American tradition of freedom it would be difficult to write them out of your constitution. Perhaps the genre of gun could be controlled State by State.
A better approach may be to develop Obamacare into an efficient and effective universal healthcare system. The USA's current approach to healthcare results in many people with mental health problems receiving either inadequate care or no care at all. I believe that the lack of a decent, universal health system contributes to the problems with apparently random violence seen too often there.
In a few decades you'd have a tiny fraction of the guns you have now, without preventing current owners from exercising their stupid, ego-fuelled right to bear arms.
Now imagine these steps had been taken a few years back. This massacre would probably not have happened.
You think you're just going to tell them they can't trade guns on second hand? Good luck enforcing that. If even a small proportion of US gun owners choose not to comply, you're looking at doubling or tripling the US prison population. And that's assuming that individual states don't just say "we're not having that" and pass local ordinances overruling federal law, which some of them absolutely would. It would be utterly unworkable.
There won't be any change because the majority of the population don't want it. And in a democracy like America the majority vote rules.
It's also notable that Clinton passed an "Assault Weapon Ban" in 1994. It didn't work, so when the sunset clause came up in 2004, Congress chose neither to renew it nor make it permanent.