The Gun Control Debate Thread

[twa]

Who the hell knows.   We aren't allowed to study the issue - and you oppose doing studies because you presume they are going to be biased.

 

Perfectly circular logic to get to the result you want.   

 

aren't allowed to lobby or advocate.....of course to liberals that is studying .

 

we do studies all the time

[mistertim]

aren't allowed to lobby or advocate.....of course to liberals that is studying .

 

we do studies all the time

Is there any sort of evidence or proof that it was or would be biased other than making "it disagrees with my ideology" equal to "biased"?

[tshile]

If we're talking about restrictions by state again, this chart probably should show up again, and NOT* because of the ranking, but because it is very informative as to what states have what laws.

 

 

 

*okay, maybe a little bit

 

And of course, state restrictions =/= federal restrictions.

 

If you don't like a state's gun laws, you can just move.

This chart is bogus.

 

I know VA's laws and acquiring a concealed permit is not 'moderate' in difficulty. It's a shall issue state - as long as you don't have a felony, or a violent (including domestic issues) or drug related arrest, all you have to do is pay a fee and fill out a piece of paper.

 

Wonder what else is bogus on that chart.

[TheGreatBuzz]

This chart is bogus.

 

I know VA's laws and acquiring a concealed permit is not 'moderate' in difficulty. It's a shall issue state - as long as you don't have a felony, or a violent (including domestic issues) or drug related arrest, all you have to do is pay a fee and fill out a piece of paper.

 

Wonder what else is bogus on that chart.

I'm interested as to what their criteria for difficulty is.  I'm in florida and mine was kind of a pain in the butt (at least compared to what I've heard described in other states).  It was supposed to be expedited (due to being active duty) but it took about 7 weeks from the time I started it until I received it.  I had to drive to a place about 1.5 hours away.  Did a bunch of crap and filled out a bunch of forms.  It wasn't cheap either.  Instead of driving I could have mailed it all in myself but I still would have had to run around to get different requirements done and things notarized. 

My wife wants to get hers (also in Florida) and is a civilian.  She will have to do all the same things but hers won't be expedited so will take even longer.  She also requires a gun safety class.  That's part of the requirement for a CCW in Florida.  I just didn't have to take it because I'm military.  The gun safety class is a few days long and not cheap either.

[twa]

Is there any sort of evidence or proof that it was or would be biased other than making "it disagrees with my ideology" equal to "biased"?

 

 you mean other than the very nature of conducting studies like them?

 

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/2003/evaluatinggunpolicy/evaluatinggunpolicy_chapter.pdf

 

read the conclusion....bias is inevitable when controlling for and contrasting different times and places.

 

naturally there is variance in how much bias.

[Slateman]

This chart is bogus.

 

I know VA's laws and acquiring a concealed permit is not 'moderate' in difficulty. It's a shall issue state - as long as you don't have a felony, or a violent (including domestic issues) or drug related arrest, all you have to do is pay a fee and fill out a piece of paper.

 

Wonder what else is bogus on that chart.

Uh ... actually, you have to take a class. I believe a certified NRA class. There are waivers, but they are for things like military or law enforcement.

[Predicto]

 you mean other than the very nature of conducting studies like them?

 

 

 

 

Bingo.

 

Studies might show that the proliferation of guns actually makes us less safe.  Or that certain limitations on the ownership of guns might make us more safe.   

 

That very possibility means that studying the question is inherently biased, and should not be done.

 

 

Why, oh why, are both sides so unreasonable on this issue  *wrings hands*  

[DogofWar1]

 you mean other than the very nature of conducting studies like them?

 

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/2003/evaluatinggunpolicy/evaluatinggunpolicy_chapter.pdf

 

read the conclusion....bias is inevitable when controlling for and contrasting different times and places.

 

naturally there is variance in how much bias.

 

I'm not sure if you're mushing "politically biased" and normal "statistical bias" (which are very different than each other, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias_(statistics)) together and saying they're one and the same, or if you're saying that because statistical studies often have statistical biases, they're not useful.

 

If it's the former, well, statistical bias and political bias are very different things.  Stat bias can be sussed out with more studies that account for and examine more factors.

 

If it's the latter, that opinion basically invalidates all studies on everything, ever, which is silly, and also not accurate, because you can often control statistical biases by conducting studies in a different way.  Of course, that requires studies to actually be happening.

[twa]

if I meant political I would have put it, though it is not unheard of obviously.

 

Invalidates by pointing out problems with the matter?....do you hate science?

 

again with the false assertion studies are not being done....odd.

[tshile]

Uh ... actually, you have to take a class. I believe a certified NRA class. There are waivers, but they are for things like military or law enforcement.

 

You can take a 30 minute online class. It's hardly a class. Yes, I believe it's 'certified' by the NRA.

 

It's a basic safety course (finger off trigger till ready to shoot, always point down range), and a breif overview of the laws.

 

It's a huge joke is what it is. As a resident it irritates me how easy it is to get a permit. Ranking it as 'moderate' tells me the person doing the ranking doesn't know what they're doing. There's nothing moderate about filling out a piece of paper, paying $50 (or whatever it is) and watching a 30 minute video on the internet. Many people spend more time on youtube  looking at cats than that.

[tshile]

I'm interested as to what their criteria for difficulty is. 

 

Whatever it is, it's terrible.

 

http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms_ResidentConcealed.shtm

 

4 page paperwork (not all of which has to be filled out) and $50 fee to your county clerks office, so you just drive into your town.

 

"Handgun safety competency certification" which you can take an online class for like $20 and just print the certificate. The online class is a video that is 20-30 minutes long. They ask multiple choice questions along the way, immediately after telling you what the answer to the question is. It's pretty much a joke.

 

Then you wait, but if it takes more than 45 days:

If Your Application is Not Complete within 45 Days – Section 18.2-308.05

If the court has not issued the permit or determined that the applicant is disqualified within 45 days of the date of receipt noted on the application, the clerk shall certify on the application that the 45-day period has expired, and send a copy of the certified application to the applicant. The certified application shall serve as a de facto permit, which shall expire 90 days after issuance, and shall be recognized as a valid concealed handgun permit when presented with a valid government-issued photo identification until the court issues a five-year permit or finds the applicant to be disqualified. If the applicant is found to be disqualified after the de facto permit is issued, the applicant shall surrender the de facto permit to the court and the disqualification shall be deemed a denial of the permit and a revocation of the de facto permit. If the applicant is later found by the court to be disqualified after a five-year permit has been issued, the permit shall be revoked.

 

So it can't possibly take longer than 45 days, else you get your permit by default. At least for a while.

[Larry]

 you mean other than the very nature of conducting studies like them?

 

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/2003/evaluatinggunpolicy/evaluatinggunpolicy_chapter.pdf

 

read the conclusion....bias is inevitable when controlling for and contrasting different times and places.

 

naturally there is variance in how much bias.

 

Don't you liberals understand?  The very nature of doing a study is biased. 

 

That's why the only people who are allowed to do studies, are lobbying groups from our side of the issue. 

[DogofWar1]

if I meant political I would have put it, though it is not unheard of obviously.

 

Invalidates by pointing out problems with the matter?....do you hate science?

 

again with the false assertion studies are not being done....odd.

 

Here's the problem with that view.

 

96% of funding for gun research dried up after the CDC ban.

 

Now, you're worried about statistical bias.  Fair enough.

 

You know how you eliminate statistical bias?  WITH MORE STUDIES.  Study X, controlling Y.  Study Y controlling X.  Study both, study neither.  Study study study until you've eliminated as many statistical biases as possible and any biases are within the margin of error.

 

But you can't do that if 96% of funding for studies has dried up.  That's going to have a tremendous and terrifying impact on the number of studies, and the fewer studies there are, the fewer things they can study in fewer ways.

 

So no, it's not a false assertion about studies being done vs. not done.  Many studies that would have happened are not being done, and the few that are being done have no other studies on the same or different factors, helping to reduce statistical bias on the issue in total.  There are so few studies done that they are basically useless, and the remedy to that is to actually do studies, lots of them; costly, time consuming studies with lots of scientists.

[Larry]

You can take a 30 minute online class. It's hardly a class. Yes, I believe it's 'certified' by the NRA.

 

It's a basic safety course (finger off trigger till ready to shoot, always point down range), and a breif overview of the laws.

 

It's a huge joke is what it is. As a resident it irritates me how easy it is to get a permit. Ranking it as 'moderate' tells me the person doing the ranking doesn't know what they're doing. There's nothing moderate about filling out a piece of paper, paying $50 (or whatever it is) and watching a 30 minute video on the internet. Many people spend more time on youtube  looking at cats than that.

 

Maybe it's "moderate", compared to other states? 

[Predicto]

Whoh - I missed the subtle retitle of the thread.

 

Nicely done.  

[tshile]

Maybe it's "moderate", compared to other states? 

 

I don't think that really makes it any better?

 

It's just one of those situations where you see something that ranks/rates something for all the states, then you see how they rated yours (where you know exactly what is going on) and it's so out of wack with reality it's hard to take anything else on it seriously.

 

I don't know how anyone who ranks VA's permit process as 'moderate' could be taken seriously by any objective person. It's a shall issue state. The only hurdle is whether you have a certain type of criminal record or have been committed to a mental institution... Everything else is a matter of time and money, even then there's a 45 day limit before you receive your permit by default.

*shrug*

[TheGoodBits]

Whoh - I missed the subtle retitle of the thread.

Nicely done.

Wow same here. Co-sign, very nice.

[mistertim]

Maybe it's "moderate", compared to other states? 

I dunno. I have a CCW in VA and it is super easy. I did a full course with shooting qualifications to get my certificate but that was just me having some standards. But tshile is correct...you can literally take a 30 minute "class" online and get a qualification certificate. Then you go fill out the form, pay the fee, and that's that. The form has a bunch of questions on it for things that would disqualify you (mental health history, substance abuse, etc), but pretty much all of them are "scout's honor". The only thing they actually check is whether or not you have any felony convictions.

[Slateman]

I dunno. I have a CCW in VA and it is super easy. I did a full course with shooting qualifications to get my certificate but that was just me having some standards. But tshile is correct...you can literally take a 30 minute "class" online and get a qualification certificate. Then you go fill out the form, pay the fee, and that's that. The form has a bunch of questions on it for things that would disqualify you (mental health history, substance abuse, etc), but pretty much all of them are "scout's honor". The only thing they actually check is whether or not you have any felony convictions.

Wrong. They also have mental health checks and drug arrests (even misdemeanors).

[tshile]

I don't know what they actually check, but I assume they do actually check all of that.

 

But i don't know that for a fact because I don't know anyone that does the checks...

 

As far as disqualifications, the link I posted has the list. It includes felonies, violent arrests (not just charges I believe?), drug offenses, if you have a restraining order, and quite a few other things.

 

Very basic stuff though.

Edited October 8, 2015 by tshile

[mistertim]

Wrong. They also have mental health checks and drug arrests (even misdemeanors).

What exactly do they check for mental health? There's no way it can be that in depth.

[TheGreatBuzz]

I am just guessing but maybe the difference between "easy" and "moderate" isn't in the classes or paperwork but what is actually disqualifying during the background check and how deep they look?!?  Anyone have any knowledge on that?

[mistertim]

Re: checks in VA for CCW for mental health. This is anecdotal obviously but you can draw your own conclusions.

 

When I applied for my CCW the first time it was denied because it said I had checked "yes" to one of the mental health history questions. I was like "wait, what? no I didn't". I have no clue if it looked like I did or if it was a clerical error or something. So I went to the Fairfax County courthouse to talk to someone, assuming I would have to provide some proof that I didn't actually have whatever mental health issue they thought I checked "yes" for (I can't remember exactly which question it was right now); there is a process to appeal that stuff so I was annoyed that I would probably have to go through that for pretty much no reason.

 

I asked the lady at the counter about it and she said "Oh, nah. Just fill out a new one and you should be fine." I was like "er, ok", figuring I would get a call from them saying "Seriously? Come on, you need to prove you're ok". Nope...I got the CCW no problem, no questions asked.

 

 

So basically its:

 

"I have a mental health issue"

"Denied"

"Oh...damn. J/K? I totally don't really"

"Oh, cool. Approved"

 

 

That was a little disconcerting. Mine was a mistake but what if some other person has a legit serious mental health issue but then decides, after being denied, that they really want that CCW and just re-applies and fills it out differently? It doesn't sound to me like they really do too much checking, even on something as potentially shady as that situation.

[TheGoodBits]

I am just guessing but maybe the difference between "easy" and "moderate" isn't in the classes or paperwork but what is actually disqualifying during the background check and how deep they look?!? Anyone have any knowledge on that?

"Moderate" is having any background check involved.

"Easy" is the Texas way, giving each newborn baby a CCL and firearm at birth.

NRA supplied definitions here.

Edited October 8, 2015 by skinsfan_1215

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

for those calling for more screening/background checks and restriction on who can own or carry:

 

will you allow those cleared and trained to carry in schools and such?

 

 

if not...why?

 

The image of waiting for armed help to arrive is not a pleasant one to those lined up for execution.

 

Are guns allowed in schools in France?