The Gun Control Debate Thread

[mcsluggo]

I can, and it would.

 

I'm just so pessimistic about this whole thing that I don't see limiting the laws actually helping.

 

 

The conservatives are right about one thing, you know.  Banning guns doesn't keep guns out of the hands of the bad guys.  Mentally ill people who want to hurt other people will find a gun if they need it.  I don't know the statistics, because I'm usually too caught up in the tragedy to look, but I now that some of these people used guns that were legally purchased but not owned by them.  In cases like that, no laws would have helped.

 

There is no way, in my opinion, to secure the rights of the second amendment and keep innocent people safe.

 

I agree, not much short of completely banning (and forcefully collecting) can be done to help in the case of a person that is murdered, and her gun used in a crime...

 

..but in most cases that isn;t what happens.  in most cases something like an irresonsible gun owner leaves a gun out and it is played with by a kid, or a person legally buys a gun and then "loses it"   (sells it to somebody that can;t legally buy guns).   

 

 

At the very least, guns should be treated like class II Controlled substances  (oxycodone and amphetamines...etc...).  People can legally get access to those drugs, but we don;t pretend like it is the same as getting aspirin.  they are REQUIRED to go through strict controls processes, and are legally responsible if somebody else gets their hands on their drugs, and they are culpable.

 

we should stop pretending that owning a gun is the same as owning a can of sparkly orange fizzy, and confers greater responsibility.  The 2nd amendment says NOTHING about how guns should be regulated, and they SHOULD be regulated.  THey all should be registered, and their current owners known and classified

 

(if someone throws out the lame-ass "yeah.. so the gubernment, or the UN, can track down all the gun owners during the next time the gubernment trise to x, y, and z..." I will shoot them myself. 

 

You should be held legally responsible (including your right to continue to own guns) for how you handle yours.  If you have a dunk incident involving guns LOSE THEM.  If you operate them irresponsibly.  Lose them.  If they are stolen.  report it.  If they are stolen multiple times (or you don;t report them stolen).   lose it.

[mcsluggo]

A....trained security guard for a whole school or college?.....you serious?

 

we don't compare to other countries....for better or worse

 

we do compare to other countries.  

 

we proudly do so when we compare well.  And we pretend like it isn't relevant when we compare poorly.  We compare poorly here, and it is chicken**** to pretend like we can just say "ah well, American exceptionalism"  The science of statistics is designed to capture, and account for asymmetries in the data pool  (its the science of politics to obfuscate that science)

[tshile]

my 2 cents:

 

If I got to be King tshile, I'd revert us back to pump action shotguns and bolt action rifles. I could be swayed to consider revolvers, but I really don't see the point. IE: Guns that serve a hunting purpose (and yes, you can protect your family with these weapons.) I'd figure out how to improve the mental health issue in this country - both by increasing funding and importance to the mental health researchers and caregivers, and in fighting the stigma of mental health in our society. I'd end the war on drugs as the money available to the black market drug manufacturers, traffickers, and drug dealers on the streets seems to fuel a lot of senseless dying and violence. Make drugs legal, regulate them, adjust the healthcare system to accommodate, adjust the education system to accommodate, and stop fueling this system that drags our country down in every way imaginable (and has a very bad impact on our neighbors to the south.) I'd figure out how to get nonviolent criminals out of the prison system. I'd figure out how to fix these broken communities that high on poverty, high on crime, high on victimization rates, high on broken families; these are the breeding grounds for majority of our violence issues and it's impossible to ignore that it's a problem spanning generations at this point.

 

And god dammit I'd fix this education system. People are resorting to shootings, both mass shootings and the street crime, because they don't feel like they have a better way. They're withdrawn from society; in two totally different ways, but they feel as though their actions are the only reasonable way forward. We have to find a way to stop people from getting to the point where shooting other people is their best path forward. For some of the mentally ill, that's not an option. We have to do more to understand them, to find out who they are, and to provide support to them AND their families.

 

This is the richest country in the world. We have among the brightest people, working at some of the best institutions. There's no reason we can't figure out a way to fix these issues.

 

 

But I don't get to be King tshile. I only get to be stupid forum whoring tshile. I've realized that the fundamental problem is the lack of ability to have an honest, intelligent debate about the issues. Everyone seems to have an agenda, everyone seems to have a bias, everyone seems to have a reason why they believe this one part of the equation is all that matters and all the others are irrelevant. And that problem exists for both sides.

Edited October 2, 2015 by tshile

[Bang]

Debating how squirrels who mass shoot get through is a tough sell.

Squirrels can be quite clever, smart and can get through screenings.

But...   your usual gangbanger can't. And in terms of gun violence, they cause more of it than anyone... your typical run of the mill criminal.

So, from the factory,,  the guns that are designated for public sale go where?

And from there, what is the next link to the public?

Somewhere in THAT small chain is where the problem that we can solve exists. we can "police existing laws".

Find a dealer selling guns under the table to criminals.

make a serious example of him.

then do it again to anyone else who does it.

 

If "criminals always get guns"..  try to make THAT at least a little more difficult.

 

(if someone throws out the lame-ass "yeah.. so the gubernment, or the UN, can track down all the gun owners during the next time the gubernment trise to x, y, and z..." I will shoot them myself.

 

 

What never fails to amuse me about these mouth breathers is that by simply POSTING THAT ON THE INTERNET, the government and UN and anyone else who wants to know,,, KNOWS.

 

Oh, Joe Blow thinks that, eh? OK, well pull his record, and put him on the list of potential gun owners.. Oh, he bought this gun in 2008, did he? Nice to know.  Loo, he took a picture of it and posted it on his facebook page, and on the "Protect the Second Amendment" page we set up to make a list of who would sign up for such a list. Thanks for offering up that information freely, Mr. Concerned Citizen.

 

Ever meet a guy who believed that stuff who was not proud to show off his collection.

On FACEBOOK no less..    lol.. i mean really..  how much of a pinhead do you need to be to not realize that whoever wants to know can easily find out?

 

~Bang

Edited October 2, 2015 by Bang

[Bang]

duplicate

Edited October 2, 2015 by Bang

[Popeman38]

I am pro-gun. Private gun ownership has been settled law for years, and a Constitutionally protected right. It's amazing how something that is "settled law" that you disagree with should be contested, but "settled law" you agree with is beyond reproach. But I digress.

 

To this subject, there are very simple and common sense based reforms that can be implemented without seriously restricting a gun owner's rights:

 

1) Close the gun show and private sale loophole - make all sales subject to the laws that exist

 

2) Waiting periods - there is no reason a gun purchase can't be delayed by 7 days (you wait for online purchases to be shipped, right?)

 

3) Trigger locks - require all firearms stored in the home to have trigger locks (yes, a "hollow" law since you can't enforce it until something goes wrong)

 

4) Background checks - more thorough, since the 7 day waiting period makes it easier to go deep

 

5) Training - require all firearm purchasers to show proof that they attended a training course conducted at their local firing range (yes, there will need to be standards approved by the govt); only one training course is required, not for each firearm

Debating how squirrels who mass shoot get through is a tough sell.
Squirrels can be quite clever, smart and can get through screenings.
But...   your usual gangbanger can't. And in terms of gun violence, they cause more of it than anyone... your typical run of the mill criminal.
So, from the factory,,  the guns that are designated for public sale go where?
And from there, what is the next link to the public?
Somewhere in THAT small chain is where the problem that we can solve exists. we can "police existing laws".
Find a dealer selling guns under the table to criminals.
make a serious example of him.
then do it again to anyone else who does it.
 
If "criminals always get guns"..  try to make THAT at least a little more difficult.
 


 
 
What never fails to amuse me about these mouth breathers is that by simply POSTING THAT ON THE INTERNET, the government and UN and anyone else who wants to know,,, KNOWS.
 
Oh, Joe Blow thinks that, eh? OK, well pull his record, and put him on the list of potential gun owners.. Oh, he bought this gun in 2008, did he? Nice to know.  Loo, he took a picture of it and posted it on his facebook page, and on the "Protect the Second Amendment" page we set up to make a list of who would sign up for such a list. Thanks for offering up that information freely, Mr. Concerned Citizen.
 
Ever meet a guy who believed that stuff who was not proud to show off his collection.
On FACEBOOK no less..    lol.. i mean really..  how much of a pinhead do you need to be to not realize that whoever wants to know can easily find out?
 
~Bang

Yet the NSA having your calling records is a massive invasion of privacy? Why is one OK and one bad? POV?

Edited October 2, 2015 by Popeman38

[tshile]

What never fails to amuse me about these mouth breathers is that by simply POSTING THAT ON THE INTERNET, the government and UN and anyone else who wants to know,,, KNOWS.

 

Oh, Joe Blow thinks that, eh? OK, well pull his record, and put him on the list of potential gun owners.. Oh, he bought this gun in 2008, did he? Nice to know.  Loo, he took a picture of it and posted it on his facebook page, and on the "Protect the Second Amendment" page we set up to make a list of who would sign up for such a list. Thanks for offering up that information freely, Mr. Concerned Citizen.

 

Ever meet a guy who believed that stuff who was not proud to show off his collection.

On FACEBOOK no less..    lol.. i mean really..  how much of a pinhead do you need to be to not realize that whoever wants to know can easily find out?

 

~Bang

 

I once tried to point that out to someone and they just kind of laughed at me.

 

*shrug* we know the US is cataloging the internet, in more ways than we're aware of lol.

 

And no, I don't understand the nature of showing off a gun collection. But I was raised not to do that, sort of like some people are raised to not gloat about (or be proud of) how they drank so much the night before   I was raised that people who show off their gun collections are the people who wind up having guns stolen from them.

[Chew]

I just typed like five paragraphs.....then deleted it all.  Not necessary.

 

i'll always have guns in my house, and I'll teach my kids how to SAFELY use them, in times of crisis if mommy or daddy are already hit.

 

of course, I'm not an orgasm-haver about that situation, but many Americans are

[Popeman38]

Not all mass shootings happen in their zones. I'm asking for an example in the past 10 years. 20 years 30 years. We're told good guys with guns stop the bad guys with them. But when?

Hence why I said mass school shootings.

 

But lets look at some:

 

Sandy Hook

VT

UCC

Ft Hood x2

Chatanooga recruiting station

Navy Yard

Santa Monica College

Aurora movie theater

Oikos University

University of Alabama Huntsville

Northern Illinois University

Amish school

Red Lake HS

University of Arizona School of Nursing

Santana HS

Columbine HS

Jonesboro, Arkansas MS

 

There are a bunch more at schools. There have been 27 since 2000 according to the chart posted earlier. All of these were declared gun free zones.

[Burgold]

I like Popeman's list of solutions. All reasonable.

[Zguy28]

Hence why I said mass school shootings.

 

But lets look at some:

 

Sandy Hook

VT

UCC

Ft Hood x2

Chatanooga recruiting station

Navy Yard

Santa Monica College

Aurora movie theater

Oikos University

University of Alabama Huntsville

Northern Illinois University

Amish school

Red Lake HS

University of Arizona School of Nursing

Santana HS

Columbine HS

Jonesboro, Arkansas MS

 

There are a bunch more at schools. There have been 27 since 2000 according to the chart posted earlier. All of these were declared gun free zones.

They are also high population concentrations where people gather. They weren't targeted because they were gun-free if that's what's being implied.

[Kilmer17]

I like Popeman's list of solutions. All reasonable.

I do as well.

 

But I don't think any of them prevent yesterday.  And maybe THAT'S the conversation we should be having.  Maybe Mass Shootings are a separate issue from Gun Control.

 

I hate all of our leaders for their inability to even have a discussion about actual issues.

[Busch1724]

There's two things to add to this and were subjects brought up a little bit ago on the previous page. The first thing is perception and how the media preys on perception. There is a perception that violent crime is up. Actually, it has taken a downward turn significantly for many decades and not just per capita but by actual instances. Population has increased, yes the number of violent crimes has gone down significantly. The image Springfield put up in post 30 is a nice quick example. 

 

The second issue touched upon is based on research. Both conservatives and liberals are guilty of dismissing quality research based on the fact the results may challenge their beliefs. Also research and data can be tweaked to validate a viewpoint. 

 

However, I think we all agree that mental illness and understanding mental illness is something that is lacking. However, the dollars have to come from somewhere and neither party seems serious about  giving up funding in one area to help this particular issue. At this point it is all talking points and lip service. Serious, unbiased research and action must be part of the solution without our biases interfering in the process.

Edited October 2, 2015 by Busch1724

[The Evil Genius]

And yet, it seems like we focus on the smaller number with much much much more $'s.

 

[Bang]

Yet the NSA having your calling records is a massive invasion of privacy? Why is one OK and one bad? POV?

Frankly, the NSA is disturbing, but overall, i have not seen any adverse affects.

The point i was making was is they don't need to make any lists.

We make them for them. All those lists and anything like that is out there for so many people.. and they lay it all out there freely.

I saw a movie once,, can't recall which,, but the line was "Imagine if we'd said in 1985 that we wanted everyone to carry a chip that will let us know where they are at all times. They'd revolt.

But then the cell phone came along and they have done it willingly".

I don't even care about any of the list arguments, I think the list we need is already there.. and that is who is authorized to sell guns. find the ones who break the laws, close the loopholes, and i believe we can make an actual dent WITHOUT jeopardizing anyone's rights.

Unfortunately, i think mass shooters are a phenomenon we're going to have to live with. I really don't see how you can stop the determined loon.. but in terms of where most gun violence comes from, i think we can

~Bang

Edited October 2, 2015 by Bang

[Busch1724]

I do as well.

 

But I don't think any of them prevent yesterday.  And maybe THAT'S the conversation we should be having.  Maybe Mass Shootings are a separate issue from Gun Control.

 

 

 Maybe the post of the day!

[bcl05]

My goodness, this subject is so depressing.  Its just awful – we lose so many lives to these ridiculous and senseless shootings, and nothing seems to be changing.  There is clearly not going to be a single, simple, easy solution.  We’ll never get rid of violence all together, but we are a pitiful excuse for a society if we don’t try. 

 

I’d like to see some real science applied to the problem.  One of the most frustrating things for me is how actual academic research into mass shootings has been so summarily suppressed.  This is clearly a national health problem.  Tens of thousands of people die from bullet wounds here every year – vastly more than any other country.  Why?  Its not a simple question, nor is it going to be a simple answer.  I’d love to see the CDC devote a ton of money and manpower to try and get to a real, data-driven, non-political answer.  I suspect that the answer will be some variant of “all of the above.”  The approach to reducing death will need to address drug violence, suicide, “random” mass shootings, and accidents.   It won’t be straightforward, but if we don’t study it systematically, it all comes back to overheated empty arguments.  Let’s really try to identify where the problems are, and what the most effective and painless ways to address them will be.  We have a system for this.  The CDC does mostly great work at identifying root causes of complex health/safety problems and can find real-world approaches to fix them.   Let’s unleash some science on this.  I’m a scientist at heart (physician by profession) and that’s where I see a potential for real, meaningful answers.   We can’t be afraid of the results of research.  I bet they’ll tell us (basically) that we are all wrong.  The problem is not just guns and not just culture and not just law enforcement.  I suspect there is some component that might be identified by research that isn’t on our collective radar screen yet.   

 

The suppression of scientific research into gun violence by the NRA (and its adherents) is just infuriating.  

[Popeman38]

They are also high population concentrations where people gather. They weren't targeted because they were gun-free if that's what's being implied.

You target "soft targets" in order to successfully complete your "mission." There is a reason these mass shootings all take place where the shooter knows he will face little resistance. You don't walk into a police station and try this because you go down immediately. You go somewhere you know you will be successful. You can say they weren't targeted solely because they are gun free zones, but they were targeted parted because of that.

[Larry]

Yet the NSA having your calling records is a massive invasion of privacy? Why is one OK and one bad? POV?

The fact that 10 people weren't killed, yesterday, by telemarketers?

[Bang]

I once tried to point that out to someone and they just kind of laughed at me.

 

*shrug* we know the US is cataloging the internet, in more ways than we're aware of lol.

 

And no, I don't understand the nature of showing off a gun collection. But I was raised not to do that, sort of like some people are raised to not gloat about (or be proud of) how they drank so much the night before   I was raised that people who show off their gun collections are the people who wind up having guns stolen from them.

Oh hell yes... i tell you what, i work with local news. and isee the weekly police blotters detailingall the crimes in the area.

Guns and prescriptions, far and away the most popular items among burglars and home invaders.

If you have a gun, keep it quiet.

I love the dopes who boast that they have a gun, and if you come try to steal it, you'r going to find out they know how to use it blah blah blah.

As if the criminal would never think to wait til you aren't home...

~Bang

[MattFancy]

"We have seatbelt laws because we know it saves lives. The notion that gun violence is somehow different......doesn't make sense." - Barack Obama

Edited October 2, 2015 by MattFancy

[mistertim]

I do as well.

 

But I don't think any of them prevent yesterday.  And maybe THAT'S the conversation we should be having.  Maybe Mass Shootings are a separate issue from Gun Control.

 

I hate all of our leaders for their inability to even have a discussion about actual issues.

I think both need to happen. Underlying causes and possible ways to address them AND gun control. Gotta go at the issue on multiple fronts. Unfortunately, most of the talking heads on the right only seem to use mental health as a diversionary tactic to steer the conversation away from gun control as opposed to being serious about getting more people access to mental health services.

 

As far as the gun control debate goes...it is over. Its done. Sandy Hook was the end. The NRA (aka gun manufacturers) won. They will not allow a debate and will not tolerate any new laws other than those that further ease gun restrictions and make it easier for people to own them. And the lawmakers they own will follow their lead.

[Popeman38]

The fact that 10 people weren't killed, yesterday, by telemarketers?

Twist much? I was talking about lists maintained by the govt. Though I'm pretty sure you knew that...

[tshile]

Not all mass shootings happen in their zones. I'm asking for an example in the past 10 years. 20 years 30 years. We're told good guys with guns stop the bad guys with them. But when?

 

It happened a few months ago. I can't remember where. It obviously wasn't a big media story.

 

It does happen. But it doesn't drive ratings. So we don't hear about it as often. There are websites dedicated to keeping track of these things.

Edited October 2, 2015 by tshile

[Kilmer17]

I know I frame things in a political sense, probably too often.  But isn't this really all about MONEY.  As long as the NRA pays for politicans to have a zero tolerance stance on even a conversation, nothing will happen.  Where are the statesmen?  Where are the leaders?  We know why the GOP wont do anything, but what most fail to acknowledge is that its the same reason the Dems wont do anything.  It's MONEY which equals POWER (ie winning elections).  Because if Obama came out with hardline proposals and made his party in Congress push legislation, they would get DESTROYED at the next election.  If not from a "pro gun" democrat in a primary, then certainly in the General.  And down ballot Dems?  They would swept out with the others.  So the Dems wont touch this issue at all other than more empty rhetoric.

 

Which brings me to my real thought.  What kind of waves could a guy like Kasich or Rubio make if they came out with a comprehensive proposal that makes serious changes to our gun laws?  And why wouldn't they?  I refuse to believe that EVERY SINGLE GOPer has a purist view of the second amendment.