The Gun Control Debate Thread

[Dan T.]

How Americans smuggle snacks into a movie theater...

 

 

 

 

 

[Sticksboi05]

With the way the terrorist watch list currently works, yes.  Improve the way that system works and speed up the process for someone to get off it that shouldn't be there (3 year olds for example) and then we can talk about using that list.

 

Well as part of the proposed bills that were ignored, one option was allowing people to appeal their place on the list and the other was giving the FBI three days to prove that person was imminently going to commit a crime, a super difficult standard to prove.

 

Don't think a 3-year old is going to be walking into a gun store by the way so I think they're covered. 

Edited June 16, 2016 by Sticksboi05

[Larry]

Well as part of the proposed bills that were ignored, one option was allowing people to appeal their place on the list and the other was giving the FBI three days to prove that person was imminently going to commit a crime, a super difficult standard to prove.

In short, the latter was simply an attempt to eliminate the list entirely.

(A notion that I can understand. But gee, can't you just be honest about it?)

[Burgold]

 

So I have really stayed out of this topic here. It is hard to keep up. I will say I believe in the 2A. I just wrote this on facebook. I would like to get everyone's thoughts on this.

 

 I have been thinking over the past few days what I would consider something that might work. I am sure that this something that both sides will not like. But I think it is a start to a middle ground. But personally I am not sure how these ideas will stop crime or what happened. But lets talk.

1. Education on guns. We need gun safety classes in schools again. One thing I have noticed is it seems a lot of people are scared of guns. There is nothing to be scared of, if you use the gun a safe way.

2. A registration on guns. So here is the thing on that every time I buy a gun, the State and Feds are notified. Lets just turn that into a registration. We can even make jobs with that. Have people sitting at a computer in putting the information into a database.

3. Going to back to the using guns safely. I do not have problem taking a gun safety class before my first purchase. This would also have a back ground check and mental heath check. But this class should be free and paid either by the states or at the federal level.

4. After taking this class. I would get a license. Lets just say this license is good for 5 years. I know a lot can change in 5 years. But the details can be hammered out later. Every 5 years, I would have to go a range. Do 30 mins to 1 hour range time. To show I can still use a gun safely. During my range time, a new back ground check and mental check is being done. I would be willing to pay a very small fee at this time. Lets say $35. But this fee will go to fund school educational gun safety classes and only that.

5. This is were I think I will lose liberals. So with this license, since this is a federal law. I should be able to walk into any gun shop in any state pay and walk out with any gun I want. Of course not fully auto. But that includes handguns, rifles, shotguns. Any legal gun.

 

I'm pretty liberal when it comes to gun control. I'd be quite happy with that including the idea that if licenced it is a national permit. One of my big problems with the way things stand today is that it's way too easy to circumvent one state's laws. For the most part, all you have to do is drive thirty minutes and you find a state that gives you what you want.

 

The other thing I would really like is real concerted research on the area of gun violence. A national database with a good operational database on what constitutes a gun death or casualty. The way the system is rigged now there are many states in which you can be shot, but the cause of death isn't listed as gun violence, but blood loss. Too often, it is up to the coroner's whim. We need real numbers and patterns to study and analyze.

Edited June 16, 2016 by Burgold

[twa]

I'd rather we not try to create another government databased that will surely fail and just allow people on terrorist watch lists to be barred. Is that such a hard compromise? At least as a first step?

 

this guy wasn't on the watchlist from what I read, nor most other shooters

 

perhaps looking at why he was cleared /not on it might help.....my kids were on it when kids(16-17)

Edited June 16, 2016 by twa

[TheGreatBuzz]

 

Don't think a 3-year old is going to be walking into a gun store by the way so I think they're covered. 

The point about the 3 year old was to show the ridiculousness of some people being on the list.  I wasn't worried about the 3 year olds right to buy a gun.

[Burgold]

 

 

Don't think a 3-year old is going to be walking into a gun store by the way so I think they're covered. 

That's another thing that I really think about. If we could get behind the idea of a licence I would strongly urge an age limit.

 

Let's say at 13 you can get a "learner's permit" meaning you can only shoot in the company of another licenced responsible adult.

At 18, you can apply and get your full licence.

[just654]

I'm pretty liberal when it comes to gun control. I'd be quite happy with that including the idea that if licenced it is a national permit. One of my big problems with the way things stand today is that it's way too easy to circumvent one state's laws. For the most part, all you have to do is drive thirty minutes and you find a state that gives you what you want.

 

The other thing I would really like is real concerted research on the area of gun violence. A national database with a good operational database on what constitutes a gun death or casualty. The way the system is rigged now there are many states in which you can be shot, but the cause of death isn't listed as gun violence, but blood loss. Too often, it is up to the coroner's whim. We need real numbers and patterns to study and analyze.

Thank you. 

 

I will say something to your reply. This goes back to the whole education on guns. You can not go to a different state and just buy a gun. 

 

So I live in MD. In MD to by a handgun most people need a HQL. So lets say I want to go to VA and buy a handgun. The first thing they are going to ask for is that HQL. if you dont have it. They stop the conversation. Lets say you do. So you much provide a dealer in MD that is willing to except the handgun. Most dealers will do this for a fee. Depends on the dealer and gun on how much the fee is. Once that is done, u will fillout paperwork for your federal back ground check. Then once u pass, u pay for the gun. The gun is now shipped to the MD dealer. You go to the MD dealer and fill out paperwork and start your waiting period. 

 

This applies to online sales as well. 

 

I can even speak to someone tying to buy in OK, living in MD without a HQl. They wouldnt even talk with him. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

Also to note that doesn't apply to long guns.

[Burgold]

Thank you. 

 

I will say something to your reply. This goes back to the whole education on guns. You can not go to a different state and just buy a gun. 

 

So I live in MD. In MD to by a handgun most people need a HQL. 

 

I can even speak to someone tying to buy in OK, living in MD without a HQl. They wouldnt even talk with him. 

Interesting. I've heard otherwise... or that a number of dealers were willing to look the other way on such things. Maybe that has more to do with gun show purchases and such. I do hope that states and the dealers within work with others.

[just654]

Also to note that doesn't apply to long guns.

Yes, but why would I go to another state to buy long guns. I can cash and carry in MD.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Yes, but why would I go to another state to buy long guns. I can cash and carry in MD.

I know that.  I was pointing it out for the less informed in here.

 

And states where you can't do that, you can drive to a neighboring state and do it.  That's one of the things people are complaining about.

Edited June 16, 2016 by TheGreatBuzz

[just654]

Interesting. I've heard otherwise... or that a number of dealers were willing to look the other way on such things. Maybe that has more to do with gun show purchases and such. I do hope that states and the dealers within work with others.

 

If they look the other way. Then it is an illegal purchase and an illegal gun. And to me then we are dealing with a different issue. 

 

I am glad u brough up the gun show issue has well. that is really over blown has well.

 

Yes you can sell private without back ground checks. But it is not like people are passing all types of guns back and forth. Most of the guns I have seen for sale or older guns. and long guns that are cash in carry. I am not saying people dont sell ARs and handguns. But I really think it is a small percentage. You can also ask any dealer at a gun show to run a background check. I have not seen a dealer charge for one before. 

[Jumbo]

In working with groups of people in complex situations with serious and complex problems (like in some family or institutional/corporate dynamics) you run into this deal where multiple competing arguments on a serious matter are of such a nature that nothing really changes over the course of many years, but the troubles, arguments, and all feelings of strife just perpetuate with no real end in sight.

 

Sound familiar?

 

 

After a certain amount of time (like years, usually) with everything you've done so far not helping either the issue or the resulting conflicts, you're left with the reality that you're still arguing about doing anything and are essentially doing all that arguing in service to perpetuating your conflicts, misery, and the problem.

 

Sometimes a useful option is taking action in the spirit of blowing a log jam or whatever frame you like---"doing the same thing..etc", "if nothing changes, nothing changes."  Even taking as much care and reason as available, any proposal of serious change in hotly contested matters will be quite imperfect to the competing participants, and you may make a mistake in the action you finally do take and maybe it's even a big one. But the existing problem was already a very very big problem.

 

At minimum it changes the choreography, something new was tried, and allows more chance for change of any kind and for more new ideas/compromises/attitude adjustments. That's a big deal in such situations. Or, as is often the case, you may find the action taken (if given just reasonable care in construction) actually does help to some degree beyond just providing "movement", even if it requires trial and modifying along the way.

 

 

Waiting for some "perfect" legislation (for those even open to any) in terms of balancing freedoms with restrictions "enough", and being effective "enough," etc., that would appease all sides on this is pointless. Craft some basic, as intelligent as possible, proposal. Then just do it and see how horrific or beneficial the result. We already know what our current status quo brings to the table. Make a new change in some type of gun availability/access, even if flawed. Take a risk. If it's considered a "mistake" piece of legislation later, redo. "They" are not going to repeal the 2nd amendment any time soon. Or keep arguing for the status quo, or the demand for "perfect gun legislation, if any."

 

The news will keep you apprised of your good works.

[Skinsfan1311]

You can get an ar-15 for under $500

nobody has a gun inside a club. Well, ones that frisk anyways...which might've made the club even more attractive for this nut job.

typical coward ****es, they like to shoot at people who can't shoot back.

Legally??

I don't believe it. Not in Maryland, anyway

Thank you.

I will say something to your reply. This goes back to the whole education on guns. You can not go to a different state and just buy a gun.

So I live in MD. In MD to by a handgun most people need a HQL. So lets say I want to go to VA and buy a handgun. The first thing they are going to ask for is that HQL. if you dont have it. They stop the conversation. Lets say you do. So you much provide a dealer in MD that is willing to except the handgun. Most dealers will do this for a fee. Depends on the dealer and gun on how much the fee is. Once that is done, u will fillout paperwork for your federal back ground check. Then once u pass, u pay for the gun. The gun is now shipped to the MD dealer. You go to the MD dealer and fill out paperwork and start your waiting period.

This applies to online sales as well.

I can even speak to someone tying to buy in OK, living in MD without a HQl. They wouldnt even talk with him.

Some out of state dealers don't want to deal with you, once they find out that you're a MD citizen.

[visionary]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/joe-manchin-gun-control-224425

Manchin: Due process is 'killing us right now' in gun debate

 

The main sticking point to resolving congressional disputes over gun control is balancing the constitutional right to due process with the urgency to prevent future terrorist shootings like the one that claimed the lives of 49 people, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Thursday.

 

"The problem we have, and really the firewall we have right now is due process. It's all due process," Manchin said during a discussion on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." "So we can all say we want the same thing, but how do we get there?"

 

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn's (R-Texas) proposal would allow the attorney general to delay the purchase of a gun for up to three days, while Sen. Pat Toomey (D-Pa.) has introduced legislation that would require the attorney general to submit terror watch lists to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as a check on power.

 

"If a person is on the terrorist watch list like the gentleman, the shooter in Orlando, twice by the FBI, we were briefed yesterday about what happened but that man was brought in twice. They did everything they could," Manchin said. "The FBI did everything they were supposed to do but there was no way to keep him on the nix list or keep him off the gun buy list. There was no way to do that. So can’t we say that if a person under suspicion, there should be a five-year period of time that we have to see if good behavior, if this person continues the same traits, maybe we could come to that type of an agreement. But due process is what's killing us right now."

Edited June 16, 2016 by visionary

[Burgold]

Legally??

I don't believe it. Not in Maryland, anyway

Some out of state dealers don't want to deal with you, once they find out that you're a MD citizen.

I wonder if MD is relatively unique in that way?

[just654]

I wonder if MD is relatively unique in that way?

 

Well I know I have looked at Ar-15s in Va and they are at least 1,200 and I have seen then has high 2,000. 

 

MD might be unique in some ways. But my gut tells me is the media tries to push what they want people to think. 

[tshile]

never mind.

Edited June 16, 2016 by tshile

[TheGreatBuzz]

Well I know I have looked at Ar-15s in Va and they are at least 1,200 and I have seen then has high 2,000. 

 

MD might be unique in some ways. But my gut tells me is the media tries to push what they want people to think. 

 I wonder how much price changes by area.  I can get a brand new Bushmaster QRC for $600 here in Pensacola.  By no means is that a nice AR but it will serve someones purpose.  I can also find them well into the thousands of dollars.

[visionary]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/sherrod-brown-nra-republicans-224445

Sherrod Brown: NRA 'sticks claws into' Republicans to stop gun control

 

With the Senate set to vote on, but not pass, gun control legislation in the coming days, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said Thursday he's "seen this movie before": A mass shooting, a nationwide outpouring of grief, and no resulting action from Congress.

 

The potential vice presidential pick said he hopes it ends differently this time, but is wary the National Rifle Association will lean on Republicans to oppose any new restrictions.
 

"Well, we’ve seen this movie before, where we maybe get a vote on something but then the gun lobby, the special interest group in Washington that represents the manufacturers of firearms, that make a lot of money from gun sales, they stick their claws in too far to many Republican members and we can’t get the bill through,” Brown told Yahoo! News’ Paul Beban. “We’re going to keep trying until it happens. I’m more optimistic than I’ve been in the past because at least they’re saying they’re going to try. But we haven’t seen the gun lobby go to work yet the way they usually do in this.”

 

Spurred by a nearly 15-hour filibuster launched Wednesday by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), the Senate is likely to vote on a package of gun control amendments, including one that would prohibit individuals on terrorist watch lists from purchasing firearms. The NRA has thus far struck a more conciliatory tone, offering to meet and discuss the issue with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who wrote on Twitter that he supports legislation similar to what the Senate is discussing.

 

Brown said he was also unimpressed by Trump’s newly-stated position that he supports banning suspected terrorists from legally purchasing guns, questioning why the presumptive Republican nominee would need to meet with the NRA about it. The Ohio senator characterized the meeting as the Republican Party continuing to do the bidding of the gun lobby.

 

“I’m not clear why Donald Trump, why we need a presidential candidate to get permission from the NRA to do something. I don’t really understand that,” Brown said.

Edited June 16, 2016 by visionary

[TheGoodBits]

I wonder how much price changes by area. I can get a brand new Bushmaster QRC for $600 here in Pensacola. By no means is that a nice AR but it will serve someones purpose. I can also find them well into the thousands of dollars.

You can buy a crappy DPMS (among others) for $500 from an online store and have it shipped to your local FFL to complete the transfer for $30. Even a decent S&W entry level M&P Sport is under $650. There are tons of options under $1k.

Edited June 16, 2016 by skinsfan_1215

[btfoom]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/joe-manchin-gun-control-224425

 

Wow, so now it's OK to suspend due process for the sake of 'gun control'.

 

How about we suspend it in every inner-city and have the police go block by block, knocking down doors and raiding the houses, looking for drugs and guns.

 

How about we suspend due-process and let cops pull over any driver who looks 'out of the norm' of people driving through a neighborhood or driving certain types of cars.

 

There are plenty of laws that address guns - we need to have due process.  That guy really didn't think his point through.

[PeterMP]

Wow, so now it's OK to suspend due process for the sake of 'gun control'.

 

Umm, he didn't say we should suspend due process.

 

On the other topic of getting a gun out of state, in theory and by law, it is hard to do.  Practically, it is one of those things that is relatively easy  and in a state like NY > 2/3 of the guns associated with crime actually come from out of state.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/12/us/gun-traffickers-smuggling-state-gun-laws.html?_r=0

[Burgold]

Wow, so now it's OK to suspend due process for the sake of 'gun control'.

I liken it to a police officer taking away your keys after pulling you over. You didn't get due process to lose the right to drive home. Suspicion is sufficient. If your behaviors are erratic and dangerous enough... a temporary suspension pending trial seems not out of order.

  Practically, it is one of those things that is relatively easy  and in a state like NY > 2/3 of the guns associated with crime actually come from out of state.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/12/us/gun-traffickers-smuggling-state-gun-laws.html?_r=0

That jibes with what I understood as well.