Gun Control Debate #1

[K_Z]

I hear what you're saying about bump stocks, but again, if someone wants to alter a firearm to shoot full auto, or modify it in other ways, they simply do it. Or they build whatever they want from parts-- and there are ways to get lower units (the only part with a serial number that is tracked) if that's what they're after. Not legal, of course, but criminals seldom worry about what is "legal".

The definition of "assault rifle" is ridiculous, illogical, and inconsistent. California has a full 2 page algorithm to determine if a gun is legal or not, or if it's an "assault rifle".

We happen to have had some mass shootings using legally procured weapons recently-- but shootings and killings using illegally obtained weapons, in the hands of those not legally authorized to own them, FAR FAR out pace shootings and killings by legally owned weapons. That's a very inconvenient set of statistics when a school shooting happens in an upscale neighborhood, and virtually ignored when it is applied to large urban city violence.

Legal purchase is an easy place to argue for more restrictions, because lawful owners often follow the laws. If we actually acknowledge that illegally owned guns are the vastly bigger problem, we can't fix it. Heck, we can't even address criminal illegal possession because everyone laments and yells that we're picking on inner city minorities.

I am not a fan of "gun registration", because it makes gun owners targets and exquisitely vulnerable to exploitation and abuse by various segment of society.

And I am definitely not a fan of prosecuting the victims of theft-- several here have advocated for lawful owners of guns to be prosecuted if their guns are stolen, and if the stolen guns are used in crimes.

I think a huge part of where we can make a difference is in EDUCATION of the general public, thru PSA's, and in school beginning with kindergarten. All children, IMO, need safety and avoidance education about guns. We teach DARE-- we should also have a gun safety education curriculum-- how to recognize, report, properly store, train, etc, since the schools apparently have to be a substitute for much of responsible parenting these days.

And yes, we can come up with a program "different" than Eddie Eagle (the NRA education program) if that program is unpalatable to the masses. Which it is, because so many hate the NRA-- so let's come up with a new K-12 program.

Firearm safety, IMO, is exactly the same as the need for an escape plan in a fire, CPR, learning to swim, DARE, etc. We need to educate the fear about the "evilness of guns" out of a lot of people, and teach over and over that WE control the gun, the gun does not control US.

Guns don't shoot people, people shoot guns.

Most of the time good people are trained to shoot safely, and most of the people with guns are good guys protecting others. We have to teach kids that there is a difference between good gun carriers and owners, and "bad" gun carriers and owners. Just like we do with smoking, criminal behavior, and drug use/ abuse.

Restricting lawful gun ownership is only a small part of fixing all that is wrong with our "gun culture" here in the U.S. The guns aren't going away. We have to confront what we have, and EDUCATE everyone, and severely PENALIZE criminal gun possession and behavior.

We have to make it ok for kids to report adults who illegally have guns, too. As painful as that might be for everyone.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

rsbm

I disagree. My understanding is people are saying teachers shouldn’t be *required* to train/carry/use guns. I don’t see a misconception.

Others might say guns do not belong in schools even if teachers are willing to carry, because that’s a job for highly trained and skilled law enforcement professionals.

JMO
That is a common misconception that all teachers would immediately be carrying a weapon whether they are skilled or not. That is simply not true nor is anyone suggesting that. My guess is a small percentage of teachers would elect to carry and especially if there was required annual shooting training certificates that would need to be issued if one chooses to help protect themselves and the student body.

 

[bobcat]

So I was born and lived most of my life in the UK. The last mass shooting we had there was in 1996 in Dunblane. The government moved quickly and tightened up private gun ownership laws.

I now live in Canada and work with people who have been brought up hunting and who feel that gun ownership is a right.

I know some Americans hold their right to bear arms tightly. But I cannot see why most people in the US NEED guns. As an outsider the rules on gun ownership seem completely useless. You can buy a gun from a gunshow no questions asked. People can build up private arsenals of assault rifles. Who NEEDS an assault rifle? Especially in suburban America? Ok, I understand that some people need guns for hunting or as part of their jobs, but I can't think of one good reason for needing an assault rifle. The teenage boys (and it predominantly boys) shooting up schools are given unnecessary access to guns, by parents who are obviously not storing their guns or ammo in a safe enough way to keep them out of the way of these children.

There have been nearly as many mass shootings than days in the year, for nearly 5 years, in America.https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/oct/02/america-mass-shootings-gun-violence You often read of very small children picking up a handgun and shooting either themselves or someone else accidentally.

I literally can't understand how the right to own a gun can supersede other people's right to not get shot! Maybe it's a cultural thing, but the idea of having a gun in my house horrifies me. I can't ever imagine wanting to shoot one, even at a range

The reason why people would want an “assault rifle,” if not for hunting, would be for protection from others who have them. Would you want to try to protect your family from a group of criminals with so called assault rifles when all you have is, let’s say, a 6 shot revolver? Or a bolt action deer rifle that only holds 4 cartridges? Or would you feel better having the same kind of firepower that the bad guys have?

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

The reason why people would want an “assault rifle,” if not for hunting, would be for protection from others who have them. Wound you want to try to protect your family from a group of ****s with so called assault rifles and all you have is, let’s say, a 6 shot revolver? Or a bolt action deer rifle that only holds 4 cartridges?

Do more to get the illegal guns out of the hands of baddies. You disarm them, not engage in an arms race. IMO

I think we’re far too reactive about “preventing” gun violence. Guess how many firearms are stolen a year — they fuel the black market. ... Close the background check loophole for person-to-person sales in the states that don’t have that law. ... Multiple actions will reduce gun violence.

 

[bears10]

I totally agree that metal detectors and very strict enter/exit policies need to be installed immediately in every school. Its a simple thing that can be done right now to help prevent school shootings.

Schools dont have to wait on national legislation to do it. The urgency is now. So we need immediate actions and this is one thing schools can do. Some schools already have them.

Just be smart and have common sense about how they install the new procedures and make sure they have a way to have all doors open in event of a real fire. Like they could only open from the inside or something like that to allow easy exits.

Like people are saying there is going to be needed many things and this is just one of the simpler things to immediately do IMO.

It’s not about national legislation. It’s a budgeting issue. Who pays for the metal detectors? If the budget is exhausted, and there aren’t any state grants available, then the districts are in a tough spot.

 

[K_Z]

Exactly. The public should be able to lawfully own any firearm that the police can use/ carry.

I feel differently about large scale military weapons. I don't think regular civilians should be able to own anti aircraft guns, for example. Or grenade launchers.

 

[rsd1200]

Also make all states require background checks and registration for all person-to-person sales. It’s a huge loophole.

Waiting periods for all guns.

Gun purchase age lifted to 21 (with exemptions of some kind for hunting seasons) for all firearms, not just handguns.

Gun show sales is a big loophole too. I think that the person-person sales could easily be done, at a gun shop, or courthouse, in much the same way as a vehicle sale is done, only with a background check, instead of a insurance/license check. Some will get around it but nothing is fool proof.

I've no problem with the age limit either. I too think a hunting rifle would be fine though, if under age 21, and a hunter, or for other exemptions. Lots of folks around here hunt (all ages/both sexes).

 

[Blef]

The reason why people would want an “assault rifle,” if not for hunting, would be for protection from others who have them. Would you want to try to protect your family from a group of criminals with so called assault rifles when all you have is, let’s say, a 6 shot revolver? Or a bolt action deer rifle that only holds 4 cartridges? Or would you feel better having the same kind of firepower that the bad guys have?

The thing is though, assault rifles cause so much damage that if someone pulled one out and started shooting you wouldn't have time to grab yours to fire back. And the point really is, why should a person be allowed in ANY instance to own an assault rifle in the first place. America is in a no win situation. Gun control has been so lax in the US that it cannot do anything about anyone having a gun. Those who own illegally aren't going to give them up, those with them legally won't give them up so they can protect themselves from those who have them illegally. Anyone can buy a gun from a gunshow, no questions asked, therefore there is NO gun control in the US. In the meantime thousands of innocent people die because people won't give up their guns.

 

[rsd1200]

rbbm

Interesting. Where I live, friends ridicule bump stocks as a “novelty,” something to use for fun, and want to keep them. (Because the gun moves so much when it fires — not that sniper-like accuracy is required when your objective is injuring or killing almost 900 people in a crowd of 22,000 people.)

I looked up several sources, and you’re right. They’re not common.

Anyone only needs one if they’re going on a murderous rampage.

Why gun experts don’t support banning – or buying – ‘bump stocks’
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cs...s-don-t-support-banning-or-buying-bump-stocks

After Las Vegas mass shooting, 'bump stock' is hot at gun stores
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/05/after-vegas-shooting-bump-stock-is-hot-at-gun-stores.html

Just banning bump stocks is not NEAR ENOUGH to curb gun violence, imo.

Honestly? I'd never heard of them until the Vegas shooter. From what I've read, they can overheat your firearm. They're not good for them. I personally would not buy one for my semi. However, if you're someone who is out to kill folks, like trapped fish in a barrel, then you're likely not too concerned with accuracy, or your firearm. The trigger modifiers I'm not too keen on either.

 

[bears10]

I had my first run in with guns in schools in middle school in 1993. My neighbor brought a a gun to school to sell and was caught with it. The district instituted a policy that included see through back packs. Now, this was during the time of baggy jeans, which I came to learn was exactly how he got them to school later-after he completed his school "sentencing" which was off an off campus detention school. We are talking Houston in the 90's people. There was tons of gang activity in the inner city schools, but we were in the suburbs and this happened. There was a push for metal detectors, and despite the arguments of cost, feeling like a prison, taking too long for the kids to get into the school, paying to man these stations, etc, the districts figured it out. We had state of the art camera systems, parking lots were locked down like Ft. Knox, there was security at all times. I don't know when we deviated from this-and I know the rest of the nation may have never really got on board with it, but it works. We are talking about a 5A school, with over 4000 kids in the high school. The administration figured it out. I truly feel like this is the cheapest solution. Several detectors and people to man them is cheaper than replacing every door and window in the school and praying no one gets in. If I remember correctly, we had a 25 minute "free" period that was used at lunch time to accommodate the varying lunch schedules. I think this was moved to the morning so that no time was taken out of the day, but it can be done. If you are in a district that successfully uses detectors, I urge you to reach out and share your procedures with schools who don't.

It’s actually not really cheaper in the long run. I’m in the glass industry and we have contracts with many many school districts, so I’ve obviously been really looking into solutions the past week. I read about a product today that can replace existing door glass with bullet resistant glass that can delay an intruder for 10 minutes, and costs approx $1200 including installation, per door light. So sure, it would cost quite a bit to also replace the glass in the first floor windows, I’m totally guessing but maybe $500/window? It’s a one time thing, one time of getting board approval, one big expense. As opposed to buying detectors (which I am sure aren’t cheap) and then paying the salary and benefits for security workers to man said detectors. JMO

Working with school districts and their procurement departments has opened my eyes to the ridiculous and frivolous things schools spend their money on. IME, some schools spend more money on glass tabletop protectors for the faculty than it would cost to replace a few doorlites with bullet resistant glass.

 

[Inthedetails]

For anyone who is seriously interested in making progress against gun violence, I recommend the book "Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In."

Great book. Has come in handy for me many times over the years.

The comment upthread about wanting high-powered guns to match other people's high power guns reminding me of the book, so I offer the suggestion.

It's a short book - not a big investment in time, but contains useful ideas and strategies when dealing with topics that divide people. Good read.

jmo

 

[kittythehare]

BBM. Why not? Certainly teachers, and others in "helping professions" like health care professionals, social workers, etc CAN be trained to be expert marksmen, if they have the desire and ability.

Because they sign up to be teachers, for one, not marksmen.
Because they already have a huge responsibility towards keeping children safe in school shootings and because the potential for error is too high.
Marksmen are marksmen and teachers are teachers..
How can they contain a group of children and/or young adults while taking pot shots at a killer who may or may not be in their sights.. these events happen at such speed.. there's only a few minutes shooting before marksman/terrorist/shooter moves on..

 

[rsd1200]

I hear what you're saying about bump stocks, but again, if someone wants to alter a firearm to shoot full auto, or modify it in other ways, they simply do it. Or they build whatever they want from parts-- and there are ways to get lower units (the only part with a serial number that is tracked) if that's what they're after. Not legal, of course, but criminals seldom worry about what is "legal".

The definition of "assault rifle" is ridiculous, illogical, and inconsistent. California has a full 2 page algorithm to determine if a gun is legal or not, or if it's an "assault rifle".

We happen to have had some mass shootings using legally procured weapons recently-- but shootings and killings using illegally obtained weapons, in the hands of those not legally authorized to own them, FAR FAR out pace shootings and killings by legally owned weapons. That's a very inconvenient set of statistics when a school shooting happens in an upscale neighborhood, and virtually ignored when it is applied to large urban city violence.

Legal purchase is an easy place to argue for more restrictions, because lawful owners often follow the laws. If we actually acknowledge that illegally owned guns are the vastly bigger problem, we can't fix it. Heck, we can't even address criminal illegal possession because everyone laments and yells that we're picking on inner city minorities.

I am not a fan of "gun registration", because it makes gun owners targets and exquisitely vulnerable to exploitation and abuse by various segment of society.

And I am definitely not a fan of prosecuting the victims of theft-- several here have advocated for lawful owners of guns to be prosecuted if their guns are stolen, and if the stolen guns are used in crimes.

I think a huge part of where we can make a difference is in EDUCATION of the general public, thru PSA's, and in school beginning with kindergarten. All children, IMO, need safety and avoidance education about guns. We teach DARE-- we should also have a gun safety education curriculum-- how to recognize, report, properly store, train, etc, since the schools apparently have to be a substitute for much of responsible parenting these days.

And yes, we can come up with a program "different" than Eddie Eagle (the NRA education program) if that program is unpalatable to the masses. Which it is, because so many hate the NRA-- so let's come up with a new K-12 program.

Firearm safety, IMO, is exactly the same as the need for an escape plan in a fire, CPR, learning to swim, DARE, etc. We need to educate the fear about the "evilness of guns" out of a lot of people, and teach over and over that WE control the gun, the gun does not control US.

Guns don't shoot people, people shoot guns.

Most of the time good people are trained to shoot safely, and most of the people with guns are good guys protecting others. We have to teach kids that there is a difference between good gun carriers and owners, and "bad" gun carriers and owners. Just like we do with smoking, criminal behavior, and drug use/ abuse.

Restricting lawful gun ownership is only a small part of fixing all that is wrong with our "gun culture" here in the U.S. The guns aren't going away. We have to confront what we have, and EDUCATE everyone, and severely PENALIZE criminal gun possession and behavior.

We have to make it ok for kids to report adults who illegally have guns, too. As painful as that might be for everyone.

Agree with a large majority of what you say. The one reason that I think about an age limit is a lot of young folks go through some tough times and if that firearm is there, some will use it, and it's tragic.

I admit though that age limits will not stop mass shootings, or suicides, etc.. I also don't think folks should be incarcerated if someone gets ahold of their firearm(s), and commits a crime, either (Unless they knowingly sold it to a juvenile or a violent offender...).

I like the education part, a lot. I do think that gun show loopholes should be closed. I, personally, do not sell person to person, I trade back to the gun shop if I want something different.

 

[Blef]

The "guns don't shoot people, people shoot people" saying really annoys me.

Sure, people shoot people, but they need a gun to do that. And on this forum we have seen how many times that guns have devastated whole communities. Guns are designed to kill. That is their purpose. There is no other function for them.

 

[flourish]

We can't get funding to keep music and drama and other programs in schools. What more would be cut to pay for more armed guards or to train the teachers? According to the public service announcement I keep seeing, my current state of residence is one of the lowest quality in regards to schools already. People here do love their guns though so maybe they'd be willing to pass school levies for weapons-- they just haven't passed them to ensure we're having safe classrooms with heat and what not, but hey it's guns so if they'll agree to put money anywhere it's there. Because... priorities!

I'm trying to imagine fitting in marksmanship classes in-between pedagogy and learning theory when I was in University studying for my teaching degree.... Not exactly what most teachers had in mind lol.

Really though I'm okay with exploring the idea of having people in schools similar to the air marshalls on planes, but I do find it sad when we're talking about just adding more guns to the mix. What happens the first time a student disarms an armed adult at school. Bullet resistant school uniforms?

Is there even a number of lives that would be enough for some to consider more regulations?


Oh speaking of regulations... For some reason I thought the second amendment talked about a "well regulated militia?" So... why all the resistance to the regulation part? Everyone's all "you can't amend the Constitution (even though that's what the amendments literally are)" so why forget that part?

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

rsbm

True fact, K_Z! It's astounding to me that American civilians can legally own things like grenade launchers. Mind-boggling that some of these things are "freely" available in his country.

In 2017, a 37mm civilian version became available on the market that is not considered an NFA weapon. As the 37mm version is not classified as a "Destructive Device", it can be sold to the general public on the same ATF Form 4473 as most other firearms. This civilian version sells for around $2,000.

I don't think regular civilians should be able to own anti aircraft guns, for example. Or grenade launchers.

 

[flourish]

The "guns don't shoot people, people shoot people" saying really annoys me.

Sure, people shoot people, but they need a gun to do that. And on this forum we have seen how many times that guns have devastated whole communities. Guns are designed to kill. That is their purpose. There is no other function for them.

Thank you yes! So much this! Also the "car accidents happen so why not ban cars?" Imo it's willful ignorance. Deliberately obtuse.

 

[kittythehare]

It’s actually not really cheaper in the long run. I’m in the glass industry and we have contracts with many many school districts, so I’ve obviously been really looking into solutions the past week. I read about a product today that can replace existing door glass with bullet resistant glass that can delay an intruder for 10 minutes, and costs approx $1200 including installation, per door light. So sure, it would cost quite a bit to also replace the glass in the first floor windows, I’m totally guessing but maybe $500/window? It’s a one time thing, one time of getting board approval, one big expense. As opposed to buying detectors (which I am sure aren’t cheap) and then paying the salary and benefits for security workers to man said detectors. JMO

Working with school districts and their procurement departments has opened my eyes to the ridiculous and frivolous things schools spend their money on. IME, some schools spend more money on glass tabletop protectors for the faculty than it would cost to replace a few doorlites with bullet resistant glass.

I was reading a report, Chicago Tribune which stated that Florida shooter shot at the windows which did not break, strangely, in an attempt to shoot the running children- I could not help but wonder whether he had been influenced by Paddock..
Strangely the report went on to say that the principal had confirmed that the windows were openable!

Last night was the first time I watched CNn ( typically I tend to avoid tv coverage of major events and am usually unable to access cnn) and one of the parents was interviewed. Her words were haunting She said that the children were actually hunted down, within the school..

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Hallelujah, amen!

:great:

The "guns don't shoot people, people shoot people" saying really annoys me.

Sure, people shoot people, but they need a gun to do that. And on this forum we have seen how many times that guns have devastated whole communities. Guns are designed to kill. That is their purpose. There is no other function for them.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Thank you for the recommendation, Inthedetails!

For anyone who is seriously interested in making progress against gun violence, I recommend the book "Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In."

Great book. Has come in handy for me many times over the years.

The comment upthread about wanting high-powered guns to match other people's high power guns reminding me of the book, so I offer the suggestion.

It's a short book - not a big investment in time, but contains useful ideas and strategies when dealing with topics that divide people. Good read.

jmo