onthebeach,

Whatever sociopathic psychological debacle unfolded in that young man's mind, the fact remains that he was able to inflict great calamity on that school community in a very very short time with much ease...due to the ready availability of automatic assault weapons.

That these weapons are regularly chosen as the ones of choice for people who go off the deep end in the US, should send a clear message.

Bazz,

Re your comment about making american schools like prisons.
They already are!
While in New York city, I remarked to an american aquaintance that I'd noticed many schools were fenced with chain link, and had security guards at the entrance literally frisking children. Was told it was necessary to prevent children from taking weapons into school.

If we don't have similar problems here, why is it that in recent years I have noticed more and more properties being fenced or walled in? Security screens or shutters were virtually unheard of years ago, even on commercial premises. Now it is rare to see one that hasn't installed these against the mindless violence of today's louts.

The floodgates on weapons in America are wide open, and can never be closed. Even if buy back or other schemes were implemented, criminals will always be able to obtain weapons.

Cell phones have become equally dangerous in the hands of suicide bombers, and even tasers can kill.

The main difference between us and our ancestors is that we have more sophisticated weaponry at our disposal to inflict harm, and a greater population on which to use it. Evolution? What evolution? The mindset is the same after thousands of years.

worldwatcher,

Here's an article by Joe Bageant on the American condition, where he muses on "Tasering the tots" (scroll down a little way and you'll find that part - although the whole article is relevant):

http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2010/12/america-y-ur-peeps-b-so-dum.html

"...For instance, one of the questions asked regarding tasering sschool kids is: What is the allowable weight range of a child to be tasered? (Taser manufacturers say 60 pounds) Somehow by this geezer's prehistoric reasoning, that sounds like the wrong question...The truth is that we live in a society that sanctions the semi-electrocution of its own children on the grounds that it is not fatal..."What kind of community comes up with the idea of tasering its own children?"

G'day Suseonline Your comment that "do I think the perp wanted sex with the victim" only illustates how hopelessly different people can be. Open ,truthful discussion seems impossible. You must be a dreamboat to suggest that a man would want sex or a massacre.

laz91 I beg to differ.
You may have seen me in print differing with our well respected Suseonline.
And yes, yes indeed some can not sustain debate, some we can not talk to.
But as I get nearer to becoming a refugee from this my only site,I under stand the basic of debate.
Our own views are just that,others may be right us wrong.
We have egos, all of us, some miss placed self assurance too.
We prove that int his thread.
It I would think, came about because of Americas BIZARRE love of guns.
But we make it an issue in places it is not.
All of our fine words, come to nothing, IF we fail to understand, America is different.
Achievable CHANGE is different than wanted change.
IF Americas great leader fixes this problem, that strange and different country, will see him assassinated in office.
We the informed of us, look in horror at the sadness, but we are outsiders, America in the end must fix it not us.

Poirot

You must assume that anyone who asks questions contrary to the prevailing political correctness of the mob must by definition be in favour of 'assault' weapons.

The OP was directed at Australian policy and made a number of assumptions. One being that the Howard inspired gun control initiatives, which were directed solely at already law-abiding citizens, have reduced gun crime and multiple killings. They do neither, but John Howard's clever political populism and wedge politics did get him re-elected in a landslide. Both sides of politics heaved a sigh of relief though when John Howard was adamant there was not going to be a public inquiry. Wise where mental health facilities had been sold off.

It is important to move on from the silly, convenient, politically correct mantra that the 'US gun culture' (clever stereotyping from a clever politician), or availability of a firearm is THE cause. The presence of a potential weapon does not corrupt ordinary law-abiding citizens. It does not send the good bad.

Nor are these multiple homicides crimes of opportunity. Previous crimes and across all countries show meticulous long-range planning and attention to detail. All aimed at getting the maximum publicity from sensationalist media. As with Port Arthur's Bryant, the offenders are prepared to go to extreme lengths breaking available laws (of course) in the process to source their preferred weapons.

From comments responding to the usual deluge of ready-made 'gun culture' stories from media hacks, Australians are showing disquiet with the simplistic political spin that multiple killings are caused by a 'US gun culture', "Fix that with bans and she'll be apples". No, there is something more complex and sinister going on than that. The public needs to know how the multiple killing of innocents became the gold standard way for socially outcast, alienated and wronged men (if that is what they are) to get attention and go out in a blaze of publicity.

Meanwhile, surely the media has some way of reporting that could smother the personal limelight sought by these offenders? Or must the sensationalism and advertising profits always come first?