Gun Control Debate #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
There's also this:



There might be more studies and more legislation, but a lot of these bills go nowhere though because the NRA doesn't like them.

https://www.salon.com/2018/01/25/in-wake-of-school-shooting-a-look-at-how-kids-get-guns/

So quit blaming the NRA and form a new organization with $$$ and political clout for "anti gun" agendas. The NRA is not an all powerful, magical group of people. It's just an advocacy group that has become powerful over time.

Surely Oprah and all her wealthy celebrity anti gun pals could found an opposing group? Right?

I'm rather sick of the demonizing of the NRA as an excuse for failed anti gun political ideologies.

If people agree with the anti gun message in large enough numbers nation wide, they could further their agenda successfully. That hasn't happened so far.
 
It is perfectly possible to restrict the use of assault weapons to the army, without banning other guns. I know.

Are you sure? Can that be done without banning my semi-automatic 30/06 deer rifle, which only holds 5 cartridges in the magazine? It’s a detachable magazine so probably wouldn’t be too difficult to modify or manufacture a higher capacity magazine that would fit. What makes one semi-automatic rifle an “assault rifle” while another semi-automatic rifle is not, even though they’re basically all the same?
 
Are you sure? Can that be done without banning my semi-automatic 30/06 deer rifle, which only holds 5 cartridges in the magazine? It’s a detachable magazine so probably wouldn’t be too difficult to modify or manufacture a higher capacity magazine that would fit. What makes one semi-automatic rifle an “assault rifle” while another semi-automatic rifle is not, even though they’re basically all the same?

Were all those banned under the old assault weapons ban? I remember owning handguns and rifles in the 1990s.
 
Are you sure? Can that be done without banning my semi-automatic 30/06 deer rifle, which only holds 5 cartridges in the magazine? It’s a detachable magazine so probably wouldn’t be too difficult to modify or manufacture a higher capacity magazine that would fit. What makes one semi-automatic rifle an “assault rifle” while another semi-automatic rifle is not, even though they’re basically all the same?

Absolutely no idea. I am not an expert in guns, I am an expert in living in a country where school shootings do not exist and mass shootings are extremely rare and due to terrorists, not to the regular joe.
 
Were all those banned under the old assault weapons ban? I remember owning handguns and rifles in the 1990s.

No, it was not, but basically only because it doesn’t have a plastic stock and a pistol grip.
 
sbm

Your stats about suicide are incorrect. People will not just turn to another method if a gun is unavailable. And while people who attempt other methods are likely to survive and not make another attempt, most people who make an attempt with a firearm are successful.







https://everytownresearch.org/firearm-suicide/

Your link is from an organization who doesn't even pretend to be middle of the road, or scientifically based. Everytown is a heavily anti-gun activism site, starting with their logo. As such, their comments and conclusions are opinions, not scientifically based.

It's not possible to measure how many people are suicidal, and how many have attempted suicide. All we know is the number of those who completed what are determined to be suicides, using a gun. We don't know the whole population of those with suicidal ideation, and it cannot be known with any certainty. We only know those who report to an agent that is required to keep and report those statistics.

It's absurdly easy for biased agencies to produce junk science to support predetermined conclusions. And even easier to persuade people with little scientific background that opinions in these articles and studies are somehow "real facts".
 
So where do you propose to draw the line? Class A, B, C, or D?

Also, embezzlement is often more defined by the fact that the person had a specific entrustment or role. Not simply a theft.

Violent offenders. Period. For example: You beat the dog ***** out of your spouse or kids? No more legal purchase of firearms and you get yours confiscated.

Oh, and stop this bull **** of letting pedophiles out of prison. There is no cure. Pedophiles harm more children each year than mass shootings ever have and they usually get a slap on the wrist.
 
No, it was not, but basically only because it doesn’t have a plastic stock and a pistol grip.

But you're sure an assault weapons ban would lead to a total all-firearms ban if it were to happen again?
 
Violent offenders. Period. For example: You beat the dog ***** out of your spouse or kids? No more legal purchase of firearms and you get yours confiscated.

Oh, and stop this bull **** of letting pedophiles out of prison. There is no cure. Pedophiles harm more children each year than mass shootings ever have and they usually get a slap on the wrist.

So then we would have to look at every case; felon by felon? We don’t have the resources for that. These are not victimless crimes. We can’t use our own individual and subjective opinions on who is worse than whom and then make individually-based laws on a case by case basis. It would require endless manpower.

We already have a system that is not enforcing current laws of gun control when it comes to felons. Let’s not complicate the issue by saying some felons are ok to carry a firearm and some aren’t. Basically and IMO, your embezzler acquaintance did the same thing as robbing a store (but used a pen or computer instead) and luckily, no one suffered physical harm but likely financial and emotional harm.

We need responsible, sane, non-desperate, law-abiding citizens to own guns. Once you’re a felon, you’ve lost that right. I think this makes sense.
 
But you're sure an assault weapons ban would lead to a total all-firearms ban if it were to happen again?

No I’m not sure. I just don’t know how you ban one particular model without banning them all.

Also, IMO, what will happen is they will see that a ban of one style of gun didn’t work. When the next mass shooting happens and a different type of gun is used, the anti-gun people will be calling for another ban of that particular firearm.
 
No I’m not sure. I just don’t know how you ban one particular model without banning them all.

Also, IMO, what will happen is they will see that a ban of one style of gun didn’t work. When the next mass shooting happens and a different type of gun is used, the anti-gun people will be calling for another ban of that particular firearm.

I see your point.
 
Violent offenders. Period. For example: You beat the dog ***** out of your spouse or kids? No more legal purchase of firearms and you get yours confiscated.

Oh, and stop this bull **** of letting pedophiles out of prison. There is no cure. Pedophiles harm more children each year than mass shootings ever have and they usually get a slap on the wrist.

I personally despise parents that torture & abuse children physically. Although their crimes don’t often involve a gun, those offenders should not be allowed a gun. I really can’t stand those that commit identity theft and financial scams on the elderly......point being....we don’t get to cherry-pick which law we personally feel more strongly about. A felon is a felon & they cant legally own a gun.


I’m all for tightening up our system of who can obtain a gun legally. I would call for a **broader** base of those who would be legally restricted from owning a gun. But with that, we should enact stiffer penalties for felons and criminals caught in the act of a crime with a gun. Impose stricter gun running illegal sales sentences and prison time also.

I’d even approve of mental health checks for those applying for a gun. I’d up the age of purchase to 21. I’m all for a central reporting agency for those mentally ill (domestic situations & threatening persons) with mandatory investigations and possible confiscations.
 
How many people here believe that a majority of criminals will follow any new gun control laws if they are enacted?

Agreed, Ranch. Criminals are so named for a reason. As are law enforcement entities. [emoji106]
 
I would have to say that simply making something harder for a criminal to do isn't going to stop the most dangerous ones from getting and using a firearm. JMO

Hm. By OP’s logic and yours, however, it does make it more difficult, which is part of the point.

Leaving a car running with the keys in it makes it easy for a car thief to be a car thief, even though auto theft is illegal, and the owner of the car isn’t culpable for the theft. (But that’s also part of what insurance is for.)

Similarly, turning off the vehicle, locking it and taking the keys away is a proven deterrent and reduces car burglary and auto theft.

Reducing access is a proven deterrent. Most criminals are opportunists, imo. We can’t stop all crime, regardless of the laws. That’s a given, imo.

But reduction measures free up law enforcement to focus on the worst offenders, too. It makes sense, yeah?

Yes, part of the reason for creating laws with consequences is to deter crime. It’s also to punish and hold folks accountable when they do break the law. That’s called justice; law and order.
 
So then we would have to look at every case; felon by felon? We don’t have the resources for that. These are not victimless crimes. We can’t use our own individual and subjective opinions on who is worse than whom and then make individually-based laws on a case by case basis. It would require endless manpower.

We already have a system that is not enforcing current laws of gun control when it comes to felons. Let’s not complicate the issue by saying some felons are ok to carry a firearm and some aren’t. Basically and IMO, your embezzler acquaintance did the same thing as robbing a store (but used a pen or computer instead) and luckily, no one suffered physical harm but likely financial and emotional harm.

We need responsible, sane, non-desperate, law-abiding citizens to own guns. Once you’re a felon, you’ve lost that right. I think this makes sense.

We look at them when they are in the courtroom, and when they are charged. If you are charged with a violent felony, then you don't get firearms back, period. I've spent some time around felons, fwiw. You get convicted of a violent felony, then you are not a low level, non-violent, felon.

At arrest, remove the firearms, and if convicted, then sentence, and permanently remove that right. It won't make a difference though. It's just a law to make us feel good. How do you think that Chicago folks get their firearms? If a violent offender, wants a firearm, they will get one.

Which brings to my second idea, other than families keeping firearms put up, away from their kids, is that all sales, have to go through the background check. All of them. Just as you can't sell a car to a 15 year old w/o insurance or license. Just meet at the gun shop, and have a background check run. If they fail, the private sale doesn't go through. It's a feel good law, but, it's much like a lock, it keeps honest people honest.

From the link below:

"Sixty percent of guns recovered in crimes in Chicago were originally sold in other states, many with weaker gun laws. Specifically, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Mississippi all permit gun owners to sell their guns to other people without any background checks of the new buyer or paperwork recording the sale. This makes it incredibly easy for gun traffickers, violent offenders, and other prohibited purchasers to buy guns undetected."

Not all of Chicago’s crime guns are trafficked from states that fail to regulate private gun sales. Many are coming from dealers in Illinois. To begin to shrink the size of Chicago’s illegal gun market, law enforcement officers and regulators must be empowered to crack down on the businesses that contribute to the supply of trafficked guns. As reported by a former ATF agent in 2012, often dealers are smart enough to follow the letter of federal law by conducting background checks and checking a buyer’s FOID card. But when they suspect but haven’t verified the buyer is a straw purchaser, they look the other way. Technically the dealer is not violating federal law unless the dealer “knows or reasonably should have known” the buyer is a trafficker. This can be a very difficult standard to prove, and very few dealers are ever reprimanded, including dealers that are the original source of thousands of crime guns.

Note: Unless it has recently been enacted, gun trafficking is not a federal crime.

Tracing Guns (Chicago PD)
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/Assets/downloads/20151102-Tracing-Guns.pdf
 
Violent offenders. Period. For example: You beat the dog ***** out of your spouse or kids? No more legal purchase of firearms and you get yours confiscated.

Oh, and stop this bull **** of letting pedophiles out of prison. There is no cure. Pedophiles harm more children each year than mass shootings ever have and they usually get a slap on the wrist.

^^^^^^ yasssssss ^^^^^^

States can close the domestic violence loophole in the federal law, for example. Include stalkers with ROs for threats and violence in the restrictions. Include domestic partnerships in the protection. Include domestic abusers and rapists and violent crime in the restrictions.

A handful of states have closed it.

More should follow. Easy peasy. The framework is there.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...aws-those-guilty-domestic-violence/361226002/
 
I’ll just leave this here. [emoji6]

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/law

law

noun

1.
the principles and regulations established in a community by some authority and applicable to its people, whether in the form of legislation or of custom and policies recognized and enforced by judicial decision.

2.
any written or positive rule or collection of rules prescribed under the authority of the state or nation, as by the people in its constitution.
Compare bylaw, statute law.

3.
the controlling influence of such rules; the condition of society brought about by their observance:
maintaining law and order.

d1247766943978eb0c66081024af8a4a.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
1,655
Total visitors
1,815

Forum statistics

Threads
600,591
Messages
18,110,921
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top