The Gun Control Debate Thread

[tshile]

19 minutes ago, twa said:

Another one pop up?

There are probably a hundred similarly capable models out there.

We're going to play this game where the side that wants to ban a bunch of guns says they don't want to ban all guns

 

Then the side that doesn't want guns bans points out the models of guns that can do the same thing but unknown to people who don't know anything about guns

 

Then they'll get on the list

 

Then we'll wind up with a long list of to-be-banned guns from people who don't want to ban guns.

 

Then we'll all say we're reasonable and such and start over next time

[visionary]

5 minutes ago, tshile said:

We're going to play this game where the side that wants to ban a bunch of guns says they don't want to ban all guns

 

Then the side that doesn't want guns bans points out the models of guns that can do the same thing but unknown to people who don't know anything about guns

 

Then they'll get on the list

 

Then we'll wind up with a long list of to-be-banned guns from people who don't want to ban guns.

I guess it makes more sense to ban the type of weapon, but it doesn't seem some on the right (and some politicians) would support that, though there is clearly a broadbased desire for such a ban in this country.  Hopefully politicians will follow through.

Edited February 18, 2018 by visionary

[AsburySkinsFan]

19 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

Polls are starting show otherwise. The public opinion of this is turning quickly. 

 

Now im not entirely sure what you mean by radical change, I assume types of outright bans 

Polls are tricky things, people may support gun control, but is it an issue that is a high priority to them?

18 minutes ago, twa said:

 

It is harder, but I certainly support getting them out of hands that should not have them.

 

The devil is in the details,and if you don't support those suggestions then I don't think you see a real need.

Great! So I suppose you disagreed with Ted Cruz when he voted to make it easier for the mentally unstable to purchase firearms?

 

The devil is ALWAYS in the details, but certain things are VERY clear and objectively proven, like the fact that MORE guns equals MORE gun violence. And certain things are intuitively true, school faculty and staff are poor excuse for security and SWAT teams.

 

 

Edited February 18, 2018 by AsburySkinsFan

[tshile]

33 minutes ago, visionary said:

I guess it makes more sense to ban the type of weapon, but it doesn't seem some on the right (and some politicians) would support that, though there is clearly a broadbased desire for such a ban in this country.  Hopefully politicians will follow through.

Yes, it makes more sense in the aspect of crafting policy based on the actual function of the weapon.

 

I'm cool with pump and bolt action only. I could even get behind banning all handguns, or only allowing revolvers.

 

At least there's a reasonable and logical argument behind such stances.

 

You can still shoot up a group of people but the numbers will be a little less. I don't think it'll solve the problem. Maybe we agree to ban them until we can address the real problems that lead to gun violence (which will never happen, I'm sad to say) then we can discuss what guns we're allowed to have.

[GoDeep81]

That executive order he repealed also has the "devil in the details".. It was for people who got assistance on SS for mental "Impairments", not necessarily mentally "ill". And like the terror/no fly lists, it had no due process to get on or off. But as far as I know, if your documented as mentally ill, you're not supposed to be able to pass a 4473 background check anyway?

 

They need to get the FBI and DOJ and all the other law enforcement agencies fixed, who repeatedly drop the ball, before they introduce anymore laws imo.. 

[visionary]

 

[twa]

7 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Polls are tricky things, people may support gun control, but is it an issue that is a high priority to them?

Great! So I suppose you disagreed with Ted Cruz when he voted to make it easier for the mentally unstable to purchase firearms?

 

The devil is ALWAYS in the details, but certain things are VERY clear and objectively proven, like the fact that MORE guns equals MORE gun violence. And certain things are intuitively true, school faculty and staff are poor excuse for security and SWAT teams.

 

 

 

What Cruz voted for was requiring the govt to prove mental instability rather than seizing guns on far lesser criteria.

 

We need more gun violence immediately directed at mass shooters since the Dems didn't disarm folk(I can play too)

 

What about school staff that were already armed security or swat or RTT or....did becoming a educator or walking in the building somehow make them  less capable?

Some of ya'll must know some real winners that work in schools.

[Burgold]

2 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

If the Left cared so much, why didn't they do more for gun control when they had the power to?  I hate to admit it but I think Trump might be on to something there (probably by accident, even a broken clock is right twice a day) that the Left doesn't really want to fix it because they want to keep it as a hot button issue to motivate their base.

Frankly, I think the left didn't because they were cowards and intimidated by the NRA and gun vote. That's not a good reason. I think back in 2010, the mass shooting was already bad enough that we needed to do something, but it wasn't quite as bad as it is today. By the time Sandyhook (2012) the Republicans were firmly entrenched and in charge of Congress. They weren't going to pass a bill no matter how tragic events became. Still, the wimpiness of the Democrats means that there is blood on their hands too.

2 hours ago, twa said:

 

if that is true arming select staff/teachers ,better security and identifying threatening persons are probably needed...apart from a few pockets

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

Is anyone suggesting to require all teachers to carry a gun?  I haven't heard that.  If not, then it is just twisting of statements to further an agenda.  I prefer people just argue actual facts and quotes in context.

 

As for Kasich, I believe he has actually taken a stance on guns that most would agree with if you did some research.  He has parts you (or I) will like and parts that we don't.  But instead lets cherry pick certain parts and act like that makes him the hero or villain depending on our persuasion. 

 

Twisting arguments apparently is more fun than honest discussion. 

[No Excuses]

2 hours ago, Hersh said:

 

With respect, this is completely wrong. The Dem politicians didn't do anything about it in 2009/10 cause they didn't have the guts to do anything out of fear that red state Dems would lose the next election. 

 

It also wasn't that hotly contested of an issue back then.

 

The last several years have badly exposed how easy it is to purchase guns and commit mass murder in this country. 

 

And there is a particular style of gun that is used again and again and again and again.

[Cooked Crack]

19 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

As for Kasich, I believe he has actually taken a stance on guns that most would agree with if you did some research.  He has parts you (or I) will like and parts that we don't.  But instead lets cherry pick certain parts and act like that makes him the hero or villain depending on our persuasion. 

 

Twisting arguments apparently is more fun than honest discussion. 

Please tell me what he's done lately.

[Renegade7]

[Burgold]

25 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Is anyone suggesting to require all teachers to carry a gun?  I haven't heard that.  If not, then it is just twisting of statements to further an agenda.  I prefer people just argue actual facts and quotes in context.

No, but arming teachers is fairly often brought up as a possible solution.

[Kosher Ham]

25 minutes ago, Burgold said:

No, but arming teachers is fairly often brought up as a possible solution.

 

But not all teachers. 

I think the teachers should have the right. I think access is okay. 

By their own volition though. 

[Burgold]

Just now, Kosher Ham said:

 

But not all teachers. 

I think the teachers should have the right. I think access is okay. 

By their own volition though. 

I dunno. I am really wary of that. It's an idea loaded with such danger (pun intended). What if a student breaks into the teacher's desk and steals a gun? We've all been in high schools and see kids go into rages where they act in ways they regret later. What if a student or school invader grapples with and takes the gun away from the teacher. Most teachers, even gun owning ones, aren't exactly trained for combat or policing. I doubt many teachers are really mentally equipped or ready to shoot an individual and if they are not then the presence of the gun adds danger in addition to deterrence.

 

Besides, I think there's got to be a better solution than making the school a police state. I'm not trying to be hyperbolic. I just don't know how to otherwise describe a school environment where teachers are roaming the halls and classrooms wearing holsters.

[visionary]

 

[Kosher Ham]

2 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I dunno. I am really wary of that. It's an idea loaded with such danger (pun intended). What if a student breaks into the teacher's desk and steals a gun? We've all been in high schools and see kids go into rages where they act in ways they regret later. What if a student or school invader grapples with and takes the gun away from the teacher. Most teachers, even gun owning ones, aren't exactly trained for combat or policing. I doubt many teachers are really mentally equipped or ready to shoot an individual and if they are not then the presence of the gun adds danger in addition to deterrence.

 

Besides, I think there's got to be a better solution than making the school a police state. I'm not trying to be hyperbolic. I just don't know how to otherwise describe a school environment where teachers are roaming the halls and classrooms wearing holsters.

 

The desk ? haha. I'm thinking along the lines of a biometric safe. 

Also, if a teacher claims they will indeed have access the school needs to make sure that teacher has training. 

 

You are making it into something that I can't even imagine. 

[Burgold]

17 minutes ago, Kosher Ham said:

 

The desk ? haha. I'm thinking along the lines of a biometric safe. 

Also, if a teacher claims they will indeed have access the school needs to make sure that teacher has training. 

 

You are making it into something that I can't even imagine. 

I'm just imagining it in a standard school setting. But yeah, maybe that's why I can't imagine it being a good idea either.

[bearrock]

12 minutes ago, Kosher Ham said:

 

The desk ? haha. I'm thinking along the lines of a biometric safe. 

Also, if a teacher claims they will indeed have access the school needs to make sure that teacher has training. 

 

You are making it into something that I can't even imagine. 

 

I think the difficulty is balancing between secured access to guns and the quick access necessary when the mass shooting starts.  But then there's the concern with law enforcement confusion once they enter the scene.  But perhaps access to arms for highly trained and willing staff members have a place in the solution.  I would like to see it coupled with better security over access to school building and adding dedicated security staff on grounds (I would imagine throttling the point of entry makes security easier and reduces the size of the personnel necessary).

 

I think it has to be coupled with somehow restricting gun access to mentally ill.  That may require banning private sale, rigorous background checks, etc, but it has to be part of the discussion if safety from mass shooting is to extend beyond school walls.  Restricting access to someone who gov't can prove mental instability for (Cruz's vote twa mentioned) seems to be a reasonable thing to implement.  

 

As for Kasich, the fact that he took that page off his website and the way he talked about it this morning seems to indicate that he is someone who can work towards a common sense approach.  If we are going to get anything done one this, there's gotta be some willingness to give the benefit of the doubt to each other (this is just a general thing, not directed at your post Kosher Ham).

[LadySkinsFan]

So if a shooter goes into a school, how do responding police know who is the shooter and who is n armed teacher/administrator? 

 

This plan is fraught with so many problems.

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

So if a shooter goes into a school, how do responding police know who is the shooter and who is n armed teacher/administrator? 

 

This plan is fraught with so many problems.

There were people in the Vegas shooting that we armed and didn't pull there's out for that exact reason.

[Burgold]

In practical terms, as far as the gun safes, smart guns, etc. I don't see where the money is coming from. School budgets are always being slashed. Suddenly, we're going to be adding that much cost? I don't think they'd do it in that smart a way. I see them wanting to do it in the cheapest, most old West way possible.

 

After all, Old West is almost a translation for MAGA. Seriously though, Do  you see counties spending tens of thousands or hundreds of dollars per school more on equipment, training, and security features?

[Kosher Ham]

1 minute ago, LadySkinsFan said:

So if a shooter goes into a school, how do responding police know who is the shooter and who is n armed teacher/administrator? 

 

This plan is fraught with so many problems.

 

We don't know. I do know that typically LEO's do not shoot folks that put the weapon down when asked to.