Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Endus]

No, he had a legal right to custody, but he does not have a legal right to be on private property, nor to force the rightful person off of their property. His proper legal remedies were to raise the issue with the courts, and possibly the police would have assisted with the enforcement of the custodial order/ visitation rights.

If you want to get technical, if his ex-wife was court-ordered to turn their kids over for his custody time, and she was refusing (or unable; it amounts to the same thing here), then what was occurring in that moment was a kidnapping. So yeah; the father is in the legal right to push the issue against the people kidnapping his kids.

That's what refusing to turn children over for custodial rights is. It's kidnapping. Literally the legal definition.

You're probably right that the better angle would have been to back off, call the cops, and have both his ex-wife and her boyfriend arrested and charged with kidnapping. Would pretty much guarantee his ex-wife loses custody, too.

Regardless, the ex-boyfriend retreated to arm himself, rather than calling the police, so that makes the shooting first-degree murder. I could care less if you're gonna whine about a minor case of trespass at best when the father's kids are being kidnapped, it doesn't remotely justify the murder.

[Edge-]

Btw, 4th person has died following the school shooting.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59484333

Not directed at you, but a fourth child is dead.

One day this country will start giving a shit about kids. One day.

[PhaelixWW]

Not directed at you, but a fourth child is dead.

One day this country will start giving a shit about kids. One day.

What law can you suggest that would have prevented this tragic attack?

[Mayhem]

What law can you suggest that would have prevented this tragic attack?

Can you suggest one?

[Edge-]

What law can you suggest that would have prevented this tragic attack?

Repealing the Second Amendment and improved laws around gun control, including stricter safety requirements for gun owners.

I'm not gonna pretend this is an "easy fix" in the context of the US and gun culture, but it's actually a surprisingly easy fix that every other developed nation has figured out.

[Milchshake]

What law can you suggest that would have prevented this tragic attack?

Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard said at a press conference Tuesday evening that the suspect’s dad bought the gun, a a 9mm Sig Sauer SP 2022 pistol, on Black Friday. The teen had at least two 15-round magazines, Bouchard said. One of the magazines had seven rounds remaining when he was apprehended, the sheriff said.

A mandatory 10 day waiting period mighta been handy in the latest example .... Or laws concerning the storage of firearms.


thedailybeast found a blog post from the alleged Oxford High School shooter’s mother, a real estate broker

oh gawd

[PhaelixWW]

Can you suggest one?

Not really?

It's the same story every time. Safe storage laws are good, but largely unenforceable. Michigan already has a law that requires firearms be sold with some means of securing it: either a cable lock or a gun safe.

Sec. 15. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a federally licensed firearms dealer shall not sell a firearm in this state unless the sale includes 1 of the following:

• (a) A commercially available trigger lock or other device designed to disable the firearm and prevent the discharge of the firearm.
• (b) A commercially available gun case or storage container that can be secured to prevent unauthorized access to the firearm.

Considering that the father apparently bought the handgun less than a week before it was used in the shooting, we have to assume that it was still capable of being locked up... but just wasn't.


The other option would be a handgun ban/confiscation. That's exceedingly unlikely to ever happen, obviously.

- - - Updated - - -

Repealing the Second Amendment and improved laws around gun control, including stricter safety requirements for gun owners.

I mean... go for it.

I'm not gonna pretend this is an "easy fix" in the context of the US and gun culture, but it's actually a surprisingly easy fix that every other developed nation has figured out.

Your easy fix would require going back in time.

[Edge-]

Your easy fix would require going back in time.

Hence why I said it's not an easy fix in the context of the US and gun culture, but is an easy fix in every other developed nation.

I have no illusions that there's a remote chance in hell that the Second Amendment would be repealed, but if we want to start tackling this problem that's where we need to start.

[PhaelixWW]

Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard said at a press conference Tuesday evening that the suspect’s dad bought the gun, a a 9mm Sig Sauer SP 2022 pistol, on Black Friday. The teen had at least two 15-round magazines, Bouchard said. One of the magazines had seven rounds remaining when he was apprehended, the sheriff said.

A mandatory 10 day waiting period mighta been handy in the latest example .... Or laws concerning the storage of firearms.

Pretty much already addressed. Michigan required that they had the means to safely store the firearm, but they chose to ignore it even when they had it. And it's not like the kid bought the gun. I feel pretty certain that he would have still done what he did after 10 days if that's what it took. We would just be having this discussion a week into the future.

thedailybeast found a blog post from the alleged Oxford High School shooter’s mother, a real estate broker

oh gawd

It should be noted that the police were still debating charges against the parents, last I heard. Rightly so, as far as I'm concerned. This is gross negligence. The best way to make sure parents actually lock up their guns is to throw the book at them when they don't. The kid is getting charged as an adult, including terrorism charges. I feel like there's more to the parents' story that we'll find out soon.

[Endus]

Your easy fix would require going back in time.

I mean, this is high "nothing can be done, says only country where this ever happens" energy.

The reality is that things could be done, relatively easy and simple things, but Americans largely prefer the current state of mass murder and accidental shootings.

It isn't about personal defense, because any given gun is far more likely to be used maliciously than it is to be used in self defense.
It isn't about militias or anti-government stuff, because that hasn't been relevant since the 19th Century at best, and arguably not for most of that century; any populist uprising today would have to content with tanks and drones, and your AR-15 isn't gonna help against that.

It's that Americans choose the murders and gun-penis allegories over actual safety and security.

[PhaelixWW]

The reality is that things could be done, relatively easy and simple things, but Americans largely prefer the current state of mass murder and accidental shootings.

It isn't about personal defense, because any given gun is far more likely to be used maliciously than it is to be used in self defense.
It isn't about militias or anti-government stuff, because that hasn't been relevant since the 19th Century at best, and arguably not for most of that century; any populist uprising today would have to content with tanks and drones, and your AR-15 isn't gonna help against that.

It's that Americans choose the murders and gun-penis allegories over actual safety and security.

Here's a big "nope" in response to that flagrant bullshit.

[Twdft]

Your easy fix would require going back in time.

It requires a national discussion about it first and reaching consensus that the second amendment is from a long gone era and not worth having anymore.

There is no one law that could fix everything, the American mentality has to change. As long as Americans believe they have the right to use deadly violence as a valid problem solving strategy nothing will get better.

[Milchshake]

"Yet you participate in society! Curious! I am very intelligent." guys are working overtime.

[Endus]

Here's a big "nope" in response to that flagrant bullshit.

What, exactly, was "bullshit"?

Americans were offered a multitude of options on ways to reduce mass shootings in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, or any of a multitude ofother mass shootings, and every time, the answer's been a resounding "no thanks, we'd rather just keep on like this".

This isn't a case that nothing can be done. It's a case where Americans, collectively speaking, don't want anything done.

[PhaelixWW]

It requires a national discussion about it first and reaching consensus that the second amendment is from a long gone era and not worth having anymore.

So it requires a national discussion... where one side of the argument completely capitulates to the other? Might as well have a national discussion and have everyone agree not to commit murder.

There is no one law that could fix everything, the American mentality has to change. As long as Americans believe they have the right to use deadly violence as a valid problem solving strategy nothing will get better.

You absolutely have a right to use deadly force under certain circumstances. The larger issue is better defining those circumstances to prevent shitty legal escapes like Rittenhouse and this Lubbock man. Castle doctrine and stand your ground laws need to be reined in, and you should never use lethal force unless it's the last resort.

- - - Updated - - -

Minor point, gun locks tend to be absolute garbage and easily opened. Even without the key.

Bullshit. Not for most gun locks, and not without tools. There are a few exceptions, found by people who are experts at breaking/subverting/picking locks. But nothing that the average (or even above-average) kid is going to be likely to do.

- - - Updated - - -

What, exactly, was "bullshit"?

Americans were offered a multitude of options on ways to reduce mass shootings in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, or any of a multitude ofother mass shootings, and every time, the answer's been a resounding "no thanks, we'd rather just keep on like this".

This isn't a case that nothing can be done. It's a case where Americans, collectively speaking, don't want anything done.

Nope, that's just reductive bullshit. I'm not going to follow you down this blatant rabbit hole that's been traversed ad infinitum ITT already. My points have been laid out hundreds of times over already, and I don't care to entertain repetitive pedantry.

Suffice it to say that while there were a multitude of suggestions made after Sandy Hook, almost none of them were in any way related to mass shootings, and of the few that could conceivably have had an impact, there was certainly no agreement that they would actually have the desired effect.

This is why I tend to say "which potential laws would have stopped this mass shooting?" and get no feasible answer.

[Mayhem]

This is why I tend to say "which potential laws would have stopped this mass shooting?" and get no feasible answer.

Because you know it's a combination of laws and regulations, not just one law that suddenly changes everything, but it is refreshing to see someone being so open about actively trolling people.

[TexasRules]

So it requires a national discussion... where one side of the argument completely capitulates to the other? Might as well have a national discussion and have everyone agree not to commit murder.



You absolutely have a right to use deadly force under certain circumstances. The larger issue is better defining those circumstances to prevent shitty legal escapes like Rittenhouse and this Lubbock man. Castle doctrine and stand your ground laws need to be reined in, and you should never use lethal force unless it's the last resort.

- - - Updated - - -


Bullshit. Not for most gun locks, and not without tools. There are a few exceptions, found by people who are experts at breaking/subverting/picking locks. But nothing that the average (or even above-average) kid is going to be likely to do.

- - - Updated - - -


Nope, that's just reductive bullshit. I'm not going to follow you down this blatant rabbit hole that's been traversed ad infinitum ITT already. My points have been laid out hundreds of times over already, and I don't care to entertain repetitive pedantry.

Suffice it to say that while there were a multitude of suggestions made after Sandy Hook, almost none of them were in any way related to mass shootings, and of the few that could conceivably have had an impact, there was certainly no agreement that they would actually have the desired effect.

This is why I tend to say "which potential laws would have stopped this mass shooting?" and get no feasible answer.

Because there is no real solution. Chicago has some of the toughest gun laws in the country and have a high murder totals(liberal reason--brought in from other states).
Feel free to post REALISTIC solutions. Gun confiscation is not realistic. Law enforcement is not going to go door to door and attempt to take guns from everyone-- they will tell you, that is suicide. No one is going to voluntarily give up their guns. So present realistic gun laws. Present anything outside of confiscation that would have prevented the shooting in Michigan.

[PhaelixWW]

Because you know it's a combination of laws and regulations, not just one law that suddenly changes everything, but it is refreshing to see someone being so open about actively trolling people.

Cutting through the bullshit and asking a direct question is now "trolling" to you?

Weird. [Insert fucking_huge_eyeroll here]

What combination of laws would have prevented this tragic attack?

[Deus Mortis]

I mean, this is high "nothing can be done, says only country where this ever happens" energy.

The reality is that things could be done, relatively easy and simple things , but Americans largelyprefer the current state of mass murder and accidental shootings.

It isn't about personal defense, because any given gun is far more likely to be used maliciously than it is to be used in self defense.
It isn't about militias or anti-government stuff, because that hasn't been relevant since the 19th Century at best, and arguably not for most of that century; any populist uprising today would have to content with tanks and drones, and your AR-15 isn't gonna help against that.

It's that Americans choose the murders and gun-penis allegories over actual safety and security.

There is nothing easy about repealing the 2nd amendment and confiscating 300m+ of something that has been a constitutional right to own.

[Mayhem]

Cutting through the bullshit and asking a direct question is now "trolling" to you?

Weird. [Insert fucking_huge_eyeroll here]

What combination of laws would have prevented this tragic attack?

Well, it is when you acknowledge, right there in your post, that your question is pointless.

A waiting period that is used for a psychological evaluation of everyone living in the household that has access to the firearm in question or an inspection of the safety storage installations to prevent anyone but the owner from getting a hold of the firearm.

Nothing about this is easy, it will take time and money to reeducate a few million Americans about the danger of firearms.