Gun Control Debate #4

[rsd1200]

delete

 

[human]

ALICE Training Institute's "The Origin of the Lockdown," in pdf format, is good reading, and can be found here:


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw0tbSYIHQ2dLooNsFoGH4QL

Lockdown was mandated after Columbine for what I thought was the US in 1999.Perhaps not for all states?

At my school, the lucky building engineer got the job of walking around to make sure all doors were locked.

We had three gyms and no keys for the gym. What would kids do in a hallway or the cafeteria or walking between classes?

Luckily ( being very sarcastic here ) more school shootings mean that there is more information on what to do. Yay!

In my city new schools were built and remodeled to the national standard for school buildings dealing with school shooters or some such title. Architects and I forget who else got together and made a list of standards.

Of course, I bet they have been revised and have more info because there are more school shooters. Yay! For info!

Kids dying for guns.l YAY!

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

I cannot see if the incidences were identified? I cannot believe it.

The data shows deaths and mass shootings decreased, not that all shootings decreased.

Most of that change was during the assault-style weapon ban days. Ah, the glorious salad days!!! Where they merely murdered with pistols and revolvers and shotguns, minimizing the kill count and collateral damage.

/s

Had to make a dark joke. No offense meant to anyone.

Because the data shows gun reform works. I don’t believe in coincidences.

MOO

 

[rosemadderlake]

• April 20, 1999 Littleton, Colorado 14 students (including shooters) and one teacher killed, 27 others wounded at Columbine High School in the nation's deadliest school shooting. Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, had plotted for a year to kill at least 500 and blow up their school. At the end of their hour-long rampage, they turned their guns on themselves.

http://www.k12academics.com/school-shootings/history-school-shootings-united-states#.WqcKJXD3arU

---
This article covers K-12 school shooting history 1700s thru 2010... With many specific descriptions.

Regarding school shootings it appears almost all are perpetrated within the same age group - 14-17.

Bbm: I don't know how Columbine became heroes for those wanting to commit mass destruction but their intention is so sinister and in the young mind of a deranged individual - that intention is fulfilled with the easy access to a high capacity assault weapon. Lanza had wanted to go to the high school, but couldn't get in, I read somewhere. Cruz waited until he was 18, to legally purchase, but his intention was formed much earlier.

For this reason I had really hoped there would have been a much stronger response from the Fed level on increasing the age of purchase of high capacity weapons to 21.

It saddens me, I don't think there is a year without a school shooting. But the turn towards the intention of mass destruction shootings, the acceleration of the tragedies, and the inability for lawmakers to act decisively, quickly, and sensibly is even more worrying... Imo.

There have been many mass shootings and what message does it send to kids that nothing happens after Orlando, Las Vegas, and Texas... Terrorism is a war on our own soil. And the trauma and tragedy is broadcast for weeks, months, over and over...

 

[rsd1200]

If ya'll are seeing dups of my last post, I don't know what is happening. I've tried to self delete it keeps making more. sigh.

 

[human]

To clear all of this up, I merely meant that my parents totally missed the "Flower Power" movement and such. As did most folks around here. Yes, boys from here were drafted. Yes boys from here died. Yes some came home, and some came home with problems. As did their fathers, and their father's before them. There's something about fighting for one's country, in this region. We see it as honorable. None of the young men who went off to battle, knew, what was going on behind the scenes. No one screamed or spit on them when they came home here, but they didn't get parades, either.

As for the comment about Woodstock, it was a reference to that same time period, not flowing down to us. I probably know more about the culture during that time than does my spouse or ex spouse did, of whom, I'm much younger than, both. I've walked the streets of Haight Ashbury, to the Wall in D.C., and have a deep interest in our history.

The ones who weren't drafted, stayed here, in our town, and worked, and hung out, on the weekends.Two, who came home with injuries, and, who are both, now deceased, were friends of both my spouses, thus, friends of mine. Again, these are folks quite a lot older than me. I married folks much older than me. I've no use for young men. It is what it is.

The kids I knew learned about the war from kids who went in. Either they came back dead, or they came back to tell their buddies not to do it. Don’t go.

If anyone has heard from their friends what it was like, it was hell on earth for everyone.

It does not answer the question of why there were no gun issues at protests.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

• April 20, 1999 Littleton, Colorado 14 students (including shooters) and one teacher killed, 27 others wounded at Columbine High School in the nation's deadliest school shooting. Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, had plotted for a year to kill at least 500 and blow up their school. At the end of their hour-long rampage, they turned their guns on themselves.

http://www.k12academics.com/school-shootings/history-school-shootings-united-states#.WqcKJXD3arU

---
This article covers K-12 school shooting history 1700s thru 2010... With many specific descriptions.

Regarding school shootings it appears almost all are perpetrated within the same age group - 14-17.

Bbm: I don't know how Columbine became heroes for those wanting to commit mass destruction but their intention is so sinister and in the young mind of a deranged individual - that intention is fulfilled with the easy access to a high capacity assault weapon. Lanza had wanted to go to the high school, but couldn't get in, I read somewhere. Cruz waited until he was 18, to legally purchase, but his intention was formed much earlier.

For this reason I had really hoped there would have been a much stronger response from the Fed level on increasing the age of purchase of high capacity weapons to 21.

It saddens me, I don't think there is a year without a school shooting. But the turn towards the intention of mass destruction shootings, the acceleration of the tragedies, and the inability for lawmakers to act decisively, quickly, and sensibly is even more worrying... Imo.

There have been many mass shootings and what message does it send to kids that nothing happens after Orlando, Las Vegas, and Texas... Terrorism is a war on our own soil. And the trauma and tragedy is broadcast for weeks, months, over and over...

Slightly related to your post, has anyone else here read “Columbine” by Dave Cullen? It’s nonfiction, in the vein of novels like “The Executioner’s Song.”

https://books.google.com/books/abou...-sC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button

 

[bluesneakers]

The kids I knew learned about the war from kids who went in. Either they came back dead, or they came back to tell their buddies not to do it. Don’t go.

If anyone has heard from their friends what it was like, it was hell on earth for everyone.

It does not answer the question of why there were no gun issues at protests.

My brother went. He volunteered (at age 18) and served in the Navy. He never said a single word to me about it - not the ship, the ocean, the people he served with, nothing - and he never watched another war movie ever.

One time I asked him about Jane Fonda and he had no opinion, didn't care. Just that he really liked her brother in Easy Rider.

My family is full of hunters and gun owners. He didn't change that - he had guns and a crossbow and regularly went skeet-shooting and hunting.

 

[rsd1200]

Arggghhhh! What is happening????

 

[rsd1200]

So are you correcting me or agreeing with me? Sorry, it’s hard to tell sometimes.

Because I wasn’t disagreeing with your point.

I'm just stating that it was happening in the Bush years too. So, I guess I'm agreeing?

 

[K_Z]

Here’s a strategy for consideration and discussion. Let’s encourage legislators to submit legislation developing a “no gun” registry, rather than a “registry” of lawful gun owners.

We have a “do not fly” list.

We have a Sex Offender Registry.

We’ve been able, as a nation, to agree that everyone should have access to information about sex offenders in their community. Hence, we have the Sex Offender Registry available to anyone who wants to search it. And compulsory registration by convicted sex offenders.

So why not a “no gun possession or ownership” registry? List every single felon who is prohibited from buying, owning, or possessing ANY firearms. Searchable by ANYONE who wants to find out if they can sell to someone lawfully, or who knows of someone who is prohibited from possession or ownership.

I would go a step further and include legislation that prohibits those with gun convictions as minors to extend their “no ownership, no purchase” for 10 years beyond age of majority, and inclusion on the “no gun” registry at age 18 or 21. This would prevent those who had gun convictions as minors from a “do over” as a young adult until at least age 28 or 31.

This single thing, a “no gun” registry that includes minor offenders once they reach the age of majority, could fundamentally change how we address the serious issues of repeat gun felonies by repeat offenders.

But left leaning activists would fight that tooth and nail, because they would claim that inclusion of these gun felons on a “no gun” registry accessible to the public would be prejudicial to certain racial and ethnic groups. Many of these activists work to shield criminals, over the rights and safety of innocent victims and law abiding citizens.

So instead of fighting for a registry for felons, lawful, non-criminal gun owners are targeted for a "registry", and activists insist that somehow a registry of law abiding people will change the violent gun crimes of criminals. SMH. Logical fallacy at its finest.

 

[bluesneakers]

Here’s a strategy for consideration and discussion. Let’s encourage legislators to submit legislation developing a “no gun” registry, rather than a “registry” of lawful gun owners.

We have a “do not fly” list.

We have a Sex Offender Registry.

We’ve been able, as a nation, to agree that everyone should have access to information about sex offenders in their community. Hence, we have the Sex Offender Registry available to anyone who wants to search it. And compulsory registration by convicted sex offenders.

So why not a “no gun possession or ownership” registry? List every single felon who is prohibited from buying, owning, or possessing ANY firearms. Searchable by ANYONE who wants to find out if they can sell to someone lawfully, or who knows of someone who is prohibited from possession or ownership.

I would go a step further and include legislation that prohibits those with gun convictions as minors to extend their “no ownership, no purchase” for 10 years beyond age of majority, and inclusion on the “no gun” registry at age 18 or 21. This would prevent those who had gun convictions as minors from a “do over” as a young adult until at least age 28 or 31.

This single thing, a “no gun” registry that includes minor offenders once they reach the age of majority, could fundamentally change how we address the serious issues of repeat gun felonies by repeat offenders.

But left leaning activists would fight that tooth and nail, because they would claim that inclusion of these gun felons on a “no gun” registry accessible to the public would be prejudicial to certain racial and ethnic groups. Many of these activists work to shield criminals, over the rights and safety of innocent victims and law abiding citizens.

So instead of fighting for a registry for felons, lawful, non-criminal gun owners are targeted for a "registry", and activists insist that somehow a registry of law abiding people will change the violent gun crimes of criminals. SMH. Logical fallacy at its finest.

Who has said this? I have heard the same idea from many people who are left-leaning.

 

[Bernina]

Let's not forget the gun walking by our own government.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...obama-era-operation-fast-and-furious.amp.html

The Obama-era operation was a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) operation in which the federal government allowed criminals to buy guns in Phoenix-area shops with the intention of tracking them as they were transported into Mexico. But the agency lost track of more than 1,400 of the 2,000 guns they allowed smugglers to buy.

Um...........it actually started with Bush in 2005........https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gunrunner

I know this because Brian Terry was murdered by one of the weapons, and my ex BL was Border Patrol, in Arizona, and we had long discussions about it. The name of the "operation" evolved, but Obama, was NOT the originator of it, nor was it the only "gun walking" operation that lost firearms.

 

[Bernina]

Absolutely right you are, Belle. And we can stop a lot of it if we want to.


Trump looks to loosen restrictions on arm sales overseas; boost sales of firearms to foreign governments
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-looks-loosen-restrictions-arms-sales-boost-business-overseas-773852

The American Gun Glut Is a Problem for the Entire World
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...n-glut-is-a-problem-for-the-entire-world.html

From the article:

The point here is not that the AR-15 is a uniquely evil gun (it isn’t), but that while President Donald Trump demagogues about Mexican immigrants bringing drugs and crime across the border into the U.S., tens of thousands of American guns are making that journey in the opposite direction, often illegally and often destined for the people operating and profiting from the Mexican drug trade.

Mexico’s gun laws are extremely restrictive, but the proximity of the U.S. and the lack of regulation here make them relatively easy to smuggle into the country. As arms trafficking experts Sarah Kinosian and Eugenio Weigend wrote in a Los Angeles Times op-ed last year, Mexican criminals tend to get their hands on U.S. weapons the same way American criminals do: through straw purchases, in which one person buys a gun legally and sells it or hands it off illegally.

BB: ..no, just more paperwork and not the variety: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Mexico

And the US isn't the only place that Mexico gets illegal weapons......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smuggling_of_firearms_into_Mexico

 

[K_Z]

Left leaning activists are concerned about criminals being "embarrassed" or "discriminated against" by being on the list.

Imagine-- a gun range owner could instantly access the "no gun" registry of every single person who wants to target shoot. And notify police if a "no gun" listee shows up in their establishment.

The "gun show/ private sale loophole" would disappear. Make it easy to check the felon registry, and more people will do it when conducting private sales. Crowd source the monitoring of these felons-- why leave it up to NICS entirely?

It would become easier to check the registry when hiring someone for responsible positions-- far quicker and easier than the background check system. If you're on the "no gun" list, you don't get jobs working with children, or in certain jobs and industries. Felons are cut out of those jobs during the application process-- as it used to be. But that's waaay too prejudicial, right? We have just had legislation about that, and now you can't know if a potential hire is a felon until you have already made a job offer, and wasted an enormous amount of time in the hiring process. Insanity.

Landlords could check the "no gun" registry. They might require a bigger security deposit, or more signed agreements, including warnings of eviction for possession, if a potential renter is on the list. Or refuse to rent to them entirely. Imagine the wails of "prejudice" and "discrimination" there.

Neighbors who see or suspect a neighbor has guns who is on the "no gun" registry could call a tip line, and there would be a specified procedure for police to follow to investigate. Horrors! Prejudice! Discrimination!

People running for office would be checked by the media and public against the "no gun" registry to see if they were on it. Horrors! Prejudice! Discrimination!

All this leads to "discrimination" claims. As in, "a landlord wouldn't rent to me once he found out I'm on the "no gun" registry."

"I was made to sign extra agreements and papers to rent an apartment because I'm on the 'no gun' registry."

"My health insurance rates are higher because I'm on the 'no gun' registry."

"My ex wife wants to modify my parenting agreement and limit access to my kids because I'm on the 'no gun' registry."

And worst of all, men of _______ race are over represented on the "no gun" registry, compared to men of _____ race/s. Prejudice! Discrimination!

But law abiding people object to being placed on a registry, and everyone accuses them of supporting child killers. Or they wail and chest beat about the NRA.

Let's stop targeting law abiding citizens who are not felons, and blaming them for the crimes of gun felons. Let's blame and publicize the gun felons, and minors whose crimes are equivalent to gun felonies.

 

[rosemadderlake]

My brother went. He volunteered (at age 18) and served in the Navy. He never said a single word to me about it - not the ship, the ocean, the people he served with, nothing - and he never watched another war movie ever.

One time I asked him about Jane Fonda and he had no opinion, didn't care. Just that he really liked her brother in Easy Rider.

My family is full of hunters and gun owners. He didn't change that - he had guns and a crossbow and regularly went skeet-shooting and hunting.

Lost a couple of our young men from my home town to Vietnam. I had a friend who survived Vietnam, he was a Green Beret. And, Bbm, he never talked about it. My ex's father was at D-Day...he and a few remaining WWII vets were awarded the legion of honor by the French ambassador (all in their late 80's). He never talks about WWII.

 

[flourish]

Left leaning activists are concerned about criminals being "embarrassed" or "discriminated against" by being on the list.

Imagine-- a gun range owner could instantly access the "no gun" registry of every single person who wants to target shoot. And notify police if a "no gun" listee shows up in their establishment.

The "gun show/ private sale loophole" would disappear. Make it easy to check the felon registry, and more people will do it when conducting private sales. Crowd source the monitoring of these felons-- why leave it up to NICS entirely?

It would become easier to check the registry when hiring someone for responsible positions-- far quicker and easier than the background check system. If you're on the "no gun" list, you don't get jobs working with children, or in certain jobs and industries. Felons are cut out of those jobs during the application process-- as it used to be. But that's waaay too prejudicial, right? We have just had legislation about that, and now you can't know if a potential hire is a felon until you have already made a job offer, and wasted an enormous amount of time in the hiring process. Insanity.

Landlords could check the "no gun" registry. They might require a bigger security deposit, or more signed agreements, including warnings of eviction for possession, if a potential renter is on the list. Or refuse to rent to them entirely. Imagine the wails of "prejudice" and "discrimination" there.

Neighbors who see or suspect a neighbor has guns who is on the "no gun" registry could call a tip line, and there would be a specified procedure for police to follow to investigate. Horrors! Prejudice! Discrimination!

People running for office would be checked by the media and public against the "no gun" registry to see if they were on it. Horrors! Prejudice! Discrimination!

All this leads to "discrimination" claims. As in, "a landlord wouldn't rent to me once he found out I'm on the "no gun" registry."

"I was made to sign extra agreements and papers to rent an apartment because I'm on the 'no gun' registry."

"My health insurance rates are higher because I'm on the 'no gun' registry."

"My ex wife wants to modify my parenting agreement and limit access to my kids because I'm on the 'no gun' registry."

And worst of all, men of _______ race are over represented on the "no gun" registry, compared to men of _____ race/s. Prejudice! Discrimination!

But law abiding people object to being placed on a registry, and everyone accuses them of supporting child killers. Or they wail and chest beat about the NRA.

Let's stop targeting law abiding citizens who are not felons, and blaming them for the crimes of gun felons. Let's blame and publicize the gun felons, and minors whose crimes are equivalent to gun felonies.

Sources?

 

[rsd1200]

Yes, please, if they’re able to share. Thank you! ❤️

He's answering.

 

[flourish]

A ‘No Buy’ List for Guns Is a Bad Idea

Don’t expect a no-gun list to be the stopping point. We already have a no-fly list, and there is also a no-maritime list (because the destruction of a cruise liner at sea is no less terrifying than terrorism in the skies). A suicide bomber in a sports stadium could spawn a “no Super Bowl” list. A “no X” list will always tempt lawmakers. But rights lose their value when they can be emptied of meaning by an easily affixed terrorist label.

From this opinion piece:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/opinion/a-no-buy-list-for-guns-is-a-bad-idea.html

 

[flourish]

Time for a ‘No Buy’ List on Guns

Although endorsed by both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations, the creation of something like a no-buy list has been vigorously opposed by the National Rifle Association. The gun lobby*objects*that the administrations’ proposals would give the attorney general too much discretion over who is put on such a list. No one should be deprived of constitutional rights on the shaky ground that the attorney general merely suspects the person might be a terrorist.

To ensure that the no-buy list isn’t being abused, the law should also require that the attorney general file periodic, confidential reports to an appropriate congressional oversight committee where pro-gun lawmakers can police any executive branch abuses.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/...-on-guns.html?referer=https://www.google.com/