Burgold Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I think it's a Pandora's Box problem. I don't think you can get everything back on the box. I also think maybe you shouldn't. There are some legit reasons to possess a gun. Mind you, I don't think there's a good reason to own an armory or possess enough ammo to take out an entire town. If you could start from scratch I might be for getting rid of all guns. Today, no. There's just not the will to get it done. Heck, there's not enough will to implement common sense incremental changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 But you are giving reasons why people would not want it to happen. I guess what I'm talking about is only your final point. Logistically it would be challenging...but possibly worth it? Who is going to do the collecting? the police and sheriffs who are employed by these gun owners? (the ones I know would ask if you are insane) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Should make the people that don't want people to have guns collect them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Who is going to do the collecting? the police and sheriffs who are employed by these gun owners? (the ones I know would ask if you are insane) I don't know. If we had to invest a ****-ton of money to get closer to resolving this issue, I'd be fine with that. When 3,000 people were killed by terrorists the government spun up an entire new agency. Gun deaths total 10x that annually, so why wouldn't a similar response be appropriate? Create a task force or something...I have no clue, but I'm sick of hearing that we can't try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Yep, more responsible gun sales and gun owners. If this didn't happen (kids shooting parents, brothers, sisters, etc. in the household) a hundred times a year... I would say it was unfair to bring up. Sadly, we've heard variations of this story way, way, way too often. Zero chance a 16 year old bought a 9mm in a non-illegal way. But you are giving reasons why people would not want it to happen. I guess what I'm talking about is only your final point. Logistically it would be challenging...but possibly worth it?Shredding the Constitution is worth it? Seriously, the FF placed guns in the 2nd Amendment for a reason. Go read their thoughts on the people owning guns. And we have people here actually wondering about forced forfeiture of guns. I don't know. If we had to invest a ****-ton of money to get closer to resolving this issue, I'd be fine with that. When 3,000 people were killed by terrorists the government spun up an entire new agency. Gun deaths total 10x that annually, so why wouldn't a similar response be appropriate? Create a task force or something...I have no clue, but I'm sick of hearing that we can't try.And now we have backlash wanting to reverse all of the privacy invasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I don't know. If we had to invest a ****-ton of money to get closer to resolving this issue, I'd be fine with that. When 3,000 people were killed by terrorists the government spun up an entire new agency. Gun deaths total 10x that annually, so why wouldn't a similar response be appropriate? Create a task force or something...I have no clue, but I'm sick of hearing that we can't try. We try every day and have vastly more people working on it....freedom is messy gun deaths that include suicide are not a good argument imo The terror threat spinup was to prevent large scale attacks that cripple society functioning....the mass shoootings fall well below that (though providing better security and arming school staff have resulted,as well as screening for the dissaffected) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) The only way to stop the mass shooter is to find out he's got the psychological problem prior to purchase.. or he publicly declares intention. But that is a very tricky thing, and even if every person who buys a gun had to go get psych profiled (which won't happen, and is prohibitively problematic), then it still won't stop the mass shooter. It isn't that he'll go get a knife or a bomb like the pro gun side says... it's because it's very difficult to predict. You can be perfectly "sane" one day, and a month from now something causes a snap, or who knows.. the motivations themselves for such a spree are so wide and so broad it is impossible to nail it down. Predicting a psychopath or a sociopath is especially difficult because usually they're clever enough to not let anyone know what they are. Interesting read for any who want to.. http://www.amazon.com/Psychopath-Test-Journey-Through-Industry/dp/1594485755/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457019727&sr=8-1&keywords=the+psychopath+test Basically, the test is so broad that there are many many things you consider to be absolutely normal that CAN be construed as psychopathic. And one of the conclusions of the book is that because of this, anyone can be diagnosed as a psychopath. (It also puts forth the idea that one reason the world is in constant turmoil is because psychopaths and sociopaths are equipped to rise to power.. they have no empathy for whoever they crush to achieve their goals.) The mass shooter is a phenomenon that we will have to live with. Obvious red flags CAN and should be spotted however.. like the mom of tyhe freak who shot up Sandy Hook elementary school. She had legal weapons, but she also had a troubled person with a history of psychological issues living in her house. This disqualifies her, as far as I'm concerned, and while there is absolutely no way to prove it, if her weapons had not been in the house then her freak of a son may not have shot up the school. Obvious red flags like the Auroroa Clorado shooter who clearly ramped up his activity in the weeks leading up.. quit his job, made multiple gun purchases, drum magazine purchases and body armor purchases online. These should be red flags.. but.. 1. I am not sure why we can't use purchases of such things online as people to watch. this is how they nab child porn producers.. they keep tabs on sites offering illegal or immoral content. (I would think the difference would be that the porn producer continues to produce while being under surveillance until the case can be built,, whereas a shooter can snap at any time.) 2. i do believe a great many gun sellers are interested in the sale, and will ignore red flags to hurry along the approval purpose. How to tighten up on red flags,, i'd be open to suggestions. ~Bang Edited March 3, 2016 by Bang 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/03/wash-man-accidentally-killed-himself-while-taking-a-selfie-with-his-gun-police-say/ It wasn’t the first photo that the 43-year-old Concrete, Wash., resident had taken with his gun. But it would be the last. The Skagit Valley Herald reported Wednesday that the man, who officials did not name, fatally shot himself in the face while attempting to take a selfie with what he thought was an unloaded gun. #strategicthreatmanagement 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 people(other than while hunting) taking selfies w/a gun should be redflagged. and a good flogging administered 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 Guns banned at CPAC. Not kidding. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 (edited) Guns banned at CPAC. Not kidding. Wow! Now that's pretty interesting. NRA must be pissed. Best quote of the article... “The policy has pretty much been no firearms,” he told The Daily Beast. “Some people got up in arms about that.” -- an officer whose name badge read “Muldoon” Edited March 5, 2016 by Burgold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 (edited) Not to defend the kiddie carnival, but they probably would not find anyone who would insure or host the event if loaded guns were permitted. Most likely a legal thing to protect the venue and organizers. ~Bang Edited March 5, 2016 by Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Nah, this is another example of do as I say not as I do. Money at CPAC is not a problem. Their coffers are overflowing. They could buy insurance or create their own insurance if they chose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Not to defend the kiddie carnival, but they probably would not find anyone who would insure or host the event if loaded guns were permitted. Most likely a legal thing to protect the venue and organizers. ~Bang Not buying that. I thought they believe a good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with it. But they'd decided that nobody have guns there except security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 There are three reasons why gun collections won't or can't happen Legislatures won't pass that kind of law Courts would overturn it It'd be a logistical nightmare to go house to house coolect guns and then catalog, warehouse or destroy them. Furthermore, I refuse to believe that our military or police would obey such orders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 (edited) See, this right here is a major part of the problem. People love their guns more than they love the United States of America. Guns should not be more important than America. I don't think it's people love their Guns more than they love The United States of America, or that their guns are more important than the United States of America....it's that our Guns and the freedom to own and defend ourselves from aggression is an integral part of what MAKES us the United States of America. If you study all of recorded history until now...there are a thousand reasons why the right to bear arms in this country is so important. Edited March 5, 2016 by Painkiller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 If you study all of recorded history until now...there are a thousand reasons why the right to bear arms in this country is so important. And yet, according to people who really ought to know, if you study the history of this nation, this right you're claiming didn't exist until a few decades ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 And yet, according to people who really ought to know, if you study the history of this nation, this right you're claiming didn't exist until a few decades ago. It existed, the court just clarified it for the obtuse and oblivious.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 (edited) It existed, the court just clarified it for the obtuse and oblivious.. Just to pick one example, Mr. Earp and friends seemed to disagree with you. Edited March 5, 2016 by Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Just to pick one example, Me Earr and friends seemed to disagree with you. Yeah and we had the "shootout at the o.k. Corral." People died when they tried to take them, and carrying Firearms in Tombstone was a misdemeanor. People were free to carry them outside the city limits. I'm fine with certain restrictions, but wary of how those restrictions would be abused in practical application. Right here in this thread there are examples of what some people would really like to do... take our guns by force. And that is the main reason why I'm an NRA member working on a Life Membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Yeah and we had the "shootout at the o.k. Corral." People died when they tried to take them, and carrying Firearms in Tombstone was a misdemeanor. People were free to carry them outside the city limits. I note that we've moved from a guaranteed right which is clear throughout all of recorded history to well, it was only a misdemeanor, and the marshall didn't enforce the rule outside of his jurisdiction. And I'm SERIOUSLY admiring your attempt to portray the Gunfight at the OK Corral as a case of people defending their second amendment rights from gun grabbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 (edited) I note that we've moved from a guaranteed right which is clear throughout all of recorded history to well, it was only a misdemeanor, and the marshall didn't enforce the rule outside of his jurisdiction. And I'm SERIOUSLY admiring your attempt to portray the Gunfight at the OK Corral as a case of people defending their second amendment rights from gun grabbers. I never said it was a clear right throughout the course of history. I said the need for that right is clear throughout recorded history.and my use of Tombstone was no more ridiculous than yours. Edited March 5, 2016 by Painkiller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 (edited) "Nobody is saying you can't own a gun, nobody is saying you can't carry a gun...all we are saying is you can't carry a gun in Town." Virgil Earp And considering that most of the time their sole reason for even being in town was to get drunk and laid that was probably a good idea. Edited March 5, 2016 by Painkiller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 "Nobody is saying you can't own a gun, nobody is saying you can't carry a gun...all we are saying is you can't carry a gun in Town." Virgil Earp And considering that most of the time their sole reason for even being in town was to get drunk and laid that was probably a good idea. And people think that CCL on college campuses is a good idea now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Just to pick one example, Mr. Earp and friends seemed to disagree with you. yet the townfolk all had guns at home and business wouldn't be the first US marshal to disagree with me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts