Is it time for a serious conversation about Gun Control?

[McLoofus 35,182]

2 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Gotta seize the moment in some folks mind.......i guess

As I just reminded Nola again, it's not a moment. FFS, how ignorant are you? It will happen again in less than a month.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

On 2/15/2018 at 9:02 PM, RunInRed said:

So yes, we have a problem.  And it results in tragic facts like it's not even March and there have already been 18 school shootings this year.

That's not a fact. It's been called out as inaccurate by of all sources, the Washington Post...........

The school shootings statistics that have been touted by the media are misleading because of their criteria of 'school shooting'.:

Quote

Just five of Everytown’s 18 school shootings listed for 2018 happened during school hours and resulted in any physical injury. Three others appeared to be intentional shootings but did not hurt anyone. Two more involved guns — one carried by a school police officer and the other by a licensed peace officer who ran a college club — that were unintentionally fired and, again, led to no injuries. At least seven of Everytown’s 18 shootings took place outside normal school hours.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/no-there-havent-been-18-school-shooting-in-2018-that-number-is-flat-wrong/2018/02/15/65b6cf72-1264-11e8-8ea1-c1d91fcec3fe_story.html?utm_term=.446e5c497e1d

If we're going to tout statistics as a political rally cry around gun control then at least get the statistics accurate and don't frame it or define it in the most loose and basic way possible that so many are eager to do on this issue.

[aubearcat 2,137]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

Please note that neither of those two examples involve home defense.

Correct, I’m highlighting the fact that those groups are willing to use those weapons in close quarters where their friends and co-workers are located. They are doing so without fear of the round over penetrating the bad guy or interior walls, and hitting their buddies in the event of a missed shot or even a shot that hits it’s target with a friendly in close proximity  

From the training information I’ve received, most gun fights take place within seven feet. These individuals are willing to use these weapons in close quarters knowing likely the shot, if needed, will be at close range. I believe that says something about effectiveness and relative safety within those parameters. 

 

[aubearcat 2,137]

Perhaps this should be considered and may be a good start to sensible solutions. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456510/gun-control-republicans-consider-grvo

[DKW 86 7,429]

12 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Also the FBI's failure to follow protocol.... then we wouldn't even be playing this politics-blame game which is to no avail. 

That is a third part of the failure here. But fixing this will mean addressing laws, culture, and law enforcement issues.

The fix is not one thing. It is going to be all or nothing.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

You are totally missing the point.  The availability of cheap, mass-marketed assault rifles is part of the problem, psychos aside.

You're missing the point. I didn't say it wasn't part of the problem. It just seems logical that if one is going to hold that this country needs tighter gun laws, then doesn't that person, by their own admission, mean we have to regulate the type of gun by which most gun crimes occur? 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

12 hours ago, RunInRed said:

@NolaAuTiger my “liberal ass” started this thread back in 2012.  Stating liberals are just screaming for changes now that Trump is on office is flat out false.

Sorry, I wasn't aware that the immensely small fraction of "liberal asses" in here serve as a blueprint for the majority of those in America. 

Also, what post of mine are you referencing, specifically??

[homersapien 11,390]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

You're missing the point. I didn't say it wasn't part of the problem. It just seems logical that if one is going to hold that this country needs tighter gun laws, then doesn't that person, by their own admission, mean we have to regulate the type of gun by which most gun crimes occur? 

Say what?.....

 

You posted:

Yep. and when those guys come around, we need good guys with guns. I can't grasp the logic of tightening gun laws when it ultimately burdens (i.e. Homer's proposed 500% sales tax) law-abiding citizens and has no effect on the psycho hell-bent on shooting up a school.

So, do you think the large quantity of cheap and easily-available assault rifles is a problem or not?

If so, how would you suggest we address that problem?

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

53 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Say what?.....

 

You posted:

Yep. and when those guys come around, we need good guys with guns. I can't grasp the logic of tightening gun laws when it ultimately burdens (i.e. Homer's proposed 500% sales tax) law-abiding citizens and has no effect on the psycho hell-bent on shooting up a school.

So, do you think the large quantity of cheap and easily-available assault rifles is a problem or not?

If so, how would you suggest we address that problem?

Yes. I think general public access to assault rifles is an issue that needs to be addressed and perhaps reformed. I do not have a concrete answer - passing such sweeping regulation has to be balanced against procedural, substantive, and unalienable rights which cannot be infringed. Also, said regulation's effect (prospective or retroactive or both), the ramifications of such, must be thoughtfully processed as well. The vast majority of gun purchasers in America, even the vast majority of assault rifle purchasers, do not go out and commit crimes with their guns. Thus, an excessive sale's tax, while it may or may not have a deterrence/preventive effect on mass shootings, certainly would financially burden purchasers - again the vast majority of which aren't making said purchase for the purpose of using the gun to commit mass shootings. I'm not even sure that a pure hand formula analysis would even support a 500% sale's tax because the probability of loss (a mass shooting) is much less than the cost of its implementation. However, such a simple formula wouldn't necessarily mean the tax is not plausible due in part to other large competing considerations.  

If I had to answer in terms of legislation, I certainly would push for school security reform (much like airport security reform after 9/11). I would push for legislation re mental health. And yes, even gun reform. In order to successfully implement such reform (and many conservatives would oppose this because they want less government), I might even consider creating or adding to already existing regulatory agencies, to carry out said reform. In the case of adding to existing agencies, I would internally reform the agencies themselves. This means perhaps appropriating funding to ensure state of the art technical and scientific expertise to achieve goals and I would also require yearly reporting (much like State environmental agencies have to do to the National EPA). The agencies, as experts and thus in the best position to tackle said issues, would have the delegated ability from Congress to propose and pass regulation by the book (according to procedure - which yes would always include public comment). After all, this is the point of administrative agencies in the first place - they are filled with experts in the specific field because it takes unique expertise to address the issues, majority of which a member from either house in Congress lacks in the specific sense. 

In other words, reform reform reform reform. 

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

20 hours ago, homersapien said:

Don't forget troubled teenagers.  

troubled teenagers are obviously " bad guys" sometimes Homer. If your gun control ideas can prevent this type of thing we are all for. my  beef is the immediate blame game arising from these horrific tragedy's. 

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

19 hours ago, McLoofus said:

As I just reminded Nola again, it's not a moment. FFS, how ignorant are you? It will happen again in less than a month.

FFS -  had to google to find out what it mean't. pretty ignorant i suppose Loof. 

[homersapien 11,390]

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Yes. I think general public access to assault rifles is an issue that needs to be addressed and perhaps reformed. I do not have a concrete answer - passing such sweeping regulation has to be balanced against procedural, substantive, and unalienable rights which cannot be infringed. Also, said regulation's effect (prospective or retroactive or both), the ramifications of such, must be thoughtfully processed as well. The vast majority of gun purchasers in America, even the vast majority of assault rifle purchasers, do not go out and commit crimes with their guns. Thus, an excessive sale's tax, while it may or may not have a deterrence/preventive effect on mass shootings, certainly would financially burden purchasers - again the vast majority of which aren't making said purchase for the purpose of using the gun to commit mass shootings. I'm not even sure that a pure hand formula analysis would even support a 500% sale's tax because the probability of loss (a mass shooting) is much less than the cost of its implementation. However, such a simple formula wouldn't necessarily mean the tax is not plausible due in part to other large competing considerations.  

If I had to answer in terms of legislation, I certainly would push for school security reform (much like airport security reform after 9/11). I would push for legislation re mental health. And yes, even gun reform. In order to successfully implement such reform (and many conservatives would oppose this because they want less government), I might even consider creating or adding to already existing regulatory agencies, to carry out said reform. In the case of adding to existing agencies, I would internally reform the agencies themselves. This means perhaps appropriating funding to ensure state of the art technical and scientific expertise to achieve goals and I would also require yearly reporting (much like State environmental agencies have to do to the National EPA). The agencies, as experts and thus in the best position to tackle said issues, would have the delegated ability from Congress to propose and pass regulation by the book (according to procedure - which yes would always include public comment). After all, this is the point of administrative agencies in the first place - they are filled with experts in the specific field because it takes unique expertise to address the issues, majority of which a member from either house in Congress lacks in the specific sense. 

In other words, reform reform reform reform. 

I don't feel like dissecting that but let me clarify my position:

First I am stipulating that mass marketing (easy access) of relatively inexpensive assault rifles is one of the key elements in the problem of mass shootings.

One possible solution would be to tax them to reduce consumption much like cigarettes are taxed to reduce consumption.   I threw out 500% as an example based only on my guess of the amount of such a tax to be effective.  Maybe that's high, maybe it's low. 

Frankly I threw the idea of taxing them in a brainstorming mood.  But maybe, just maybe if you had to shell out say, $5,000 (or more) for an AR-15, maybe you'd have fewer teenagers buying them.

Of course there are many other things that could and should be done - like increasing purchase restrictions.  I just threw this out as one option. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

18 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

troubled teenagers are obviously " bad guys" sometimes Homer. If your gun control ideas can prevent this type of thing we are all for. my  beef is the immediate blame game arising from these horrific tragedy's. 

It's laughable to call this an immediate blame game when this has become a relatively common occurrence in our society.  It's not immediate.  It's been building for almost 20 years.  The question is, how many times does the same thing have to happen before an actual conversation takes place?  How many more kids need to die?

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

Brad? What is the answer? I did not want to respond to this thread until Red threw the Nathan G text out blaming Republicans. We are all of sick of this. I have stated that I am not going to PRETEND to have the answer. 

And yes it is immediate blame. this thread pops up in the aftermath of these events....... sadly to often today.  

[Auburn85 432]

19 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

That's not a fact. It's been called out as inaccurate by of all sources, the Washington Post...........

The school shootings statistics that have been touted by the media are misleading because of their criteria of 'school shooting'.:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/no-there-havent-been-18-school-shooting-in-2018-that-number-is-flat-wrong/2018/02/15/65b6cf72-1264-11e8-8ea1-c1d91fcec3fe_story.html?utm_term=.446e5c497e1d

If we're going to tout statistics as a political rally cry around gun control then at least get the statistics accurate and don't frame it or define it in the most loose and basic way possible that so many are eager to do on this issue.

And apparently one of the school shootings was at a school that had been shut down

http://reason.com/blog/2018/02/16/there-havent-been-18-school-shootings#comment

Quote

That is, of course, not what almost anyone means when they use the term "school shooting." It is foolish to group the Florida massacre with, say, a suicide in the parking lot of a Michigan school, especially when the Michigan school hadbeen closed for months, but that's exactly what Everytown does. It's foolish, that is, unless your goal is to shock people with the biggest number possible. That might be what Everytown is trying to do, but such deception does nothing to help advance a discussion about stopping actual school shootings.

https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2018/01/04/potterville-man-died-self-inflicted-wound-after-hours-negotiation/1002904001/

Quote

 

ST. JOHNS -- A 31-year-old Potterville man died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound in the parking lot of a former St. Johns school after hours of negotiation with police, according to a statement from the Clinton County Sheriff’s Office.....

 

East Olive Elementary has been closed since June and no children or staff were on scene at the time of the incident.

 

 

[Mims44 1,873]

I know an easy fix...

 

Need to get some PTSD crazed combat veterans in these schools, strap some Kevlar around their chest, arm them with M16's/M4's and tell them to, ya know... just do whatever.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

2 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Brad? What is the answer? I did not want to respond to this thread until Red threw the Nathan G text out blaming Republicans. We are all of sick of this. I have stated that I am not going to PRETEND to have the answer. 

And yes it is immediate blame. this thread pops up in the aftermath of these events....... sadly to often today.  

Go back a page or two.  I listed out some starting points in an answer to Proud.

And no, its not immediate.  If we don't talk about this now, WHEN do we talk about it?

[DKW 86 7,429]

This from Facebook today. The answer cannot be one-sided it must include laws, culture, everything. Just making rules against gun ownership wont do anything but redefine the issues.

[RunInRed 16,433]

 

[alexava 6,973]

12 hours ago, Auburn85 said:

And apparently one of the school shootings was at a school that had been shut down

http://reason.com/blog/2018/02/16/there-havent-been-18-school-shootings#comment

https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2018/01/04/potterville-man-died-self-inflicted-wound-after-hours-negotiation/1002904001/

 

Like bammer national championships, we are not sure which ones are legit but it's still too damn many for any damn one of us.

[RunInRed 16,433]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

This from Facebook today. The answer cannot be one-sided it must include laws, culture, everything. Just making rules against gun ownership wont do anything but redefine the issues.

Counterpoint ...

But talking about one-sided, framing the debate as “taking away all guns” is not productive to serious dialogue either.

[alexava 6,973]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

This from Facebook today. The answer cannot be one-sided it must include laws, culture, everything. Just making rules against gun ownership wont do anything but redefine the issues.

Not one person has ever claimed any measure can stop all shootings! Crystal Meth is a huge problem in this country today. I don't need to explain the hassle of buying pseudoephedrine. The limits and process stymie meth production. THEY DO NOT ELIMINATE IT. Do you think the meth problem would be worse if junkies could buy a truckload of pseudoephedrine unrestricted. NO action garantees NO results. We take no action AND keep producing assault weapons to the point of saturating the market making them cheaper. We are making this thing worse. Brace yourself.

[alexava 6,973]

7 minutes ago, RunInRed said:

Counterpoint ...

But talking about one-sided, framing the debate as “taking away all guns” is not productive to serious dialogue either.

They keep saying this and don't realize how effing ridiculous it is. or maybe they do?

[Mikey 16,630]

Apropos of nothing: I received a semi-automatic rifle for my 12th birthday.  It held 12 rounds of 22 cal. ammo. That was 1954, so semi-autos are nothing new. I never shot anybody with it but I could have done a bunch of damage at school had I, as a "troubled youth" chosen to do so. Most of my "troubled" friends had one too. None of us shot up a school. Rabbits are another story. JOIN THE RABBITS, BAN RIFLES!

Something in society has changed, my best guess is the internet and social media has changed the way kids with problems act and think but I can't prove that. Then there are the non-kid shootings by religious and political fanatics. Those have been with society forever, but they used to favor bombs over guns and some still do.

Unless something can be done about human nature, greater or lesser degrees of this sort of thing will be with us until Mars attacks. The Martians will stop this mess.

[homersapien 11,390]

22 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Apropos of nothing: I received a semi-automatic rifle for my 12th birthday.  It held 12 rounds of 22 cal. ammo. That was 1954, so semi-autos are nothing new. I never shot anybody with it but I could have done a bunch of damage at school had I, as a "troubled youth" chosen to do so. Most of my "troubled" friends had one too. None of us shot up a school. Rabbits are another story. JOIN THE RABBITS, BAN RIFLES!

Something in society has changed, my best guess is the internet and social media has changed the way kids with problems act and think but I can't prove that. Then there are the non-kid shootings by religious and political fanatics. Those have been with society forever, but they used to favor bombs over guns and some still do.

Unless something can be done about human nature, greater or lesser degrees of this sort of thing will be with us until Mars attacks. The Martians will stop this mess.

And yet, we seem to be the only country where this happens on a regular basis.  Do Americans have a unique problem with "human nature"?  I doubt it.