Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Wermys]

Everyone is up in arms about school shootings. Nothing you said will stop that short of an all out ban and confiscation. As far as homicide rates they mostly come from 5 inner cities. Remove THAT problem and we are no where near other countries rates.

I disagree with that. I think if society in general push's and enforces certain types of laws it could be effective in reducing gun violence in general and mass shooting's probably to a lesser extent. Something like I outlined would just take time to do this since nothing ever happens immediately when you are trying to force behavior changes on a large segment of the population. 99 percent of gun owners are responsible, and probably would be for something like this because they know that it should be expected of them in the first place. While those who don't follow the law will eventually have to replace some part on there gun, show up with it not being registered or try to purchase it without registration of the type of weapon its for and then have there guns confiscated because they can't follow a simple law. The way it would work is that if you owned a gun prior to mandatory registration, you are not required to register it until you HAVE to replace a component on the gun. Then it is required when you try and purchase that component that the gun its for be registered. Failing to do so will instantly result in forfeiture of all firearms and charges being brought. If found guilty you won't get your guns back and you will no longer have the right to own any firearms for a set amount of time and your guns will be sold for scrap. Now yes guns will be out there, they will exist and people will still die to gun violence, but it will steadily decline because it reinforces certain types of behavior so it will happen less and less in general because its habit forming. And also the mental health aspect will take guns out of the hands of people who never ever should have owned them in the first place. It might take a decade or two for it to be effective because of the absurd amount of guns in the country but it will work because once guns are tracked, it will be harder and harder to purchase them on the black market because of parts requirement to keep them operational and the risks involved in not following the law will cause a tightening in that market to push those the costs higher.

[Vankrys]

There was a development in the discussion:

https://i.imgur.com/kBiOzA8.gifv

there is a driver, i can even make out that he's wearing a baseball cap.

Anyway, what does that have to do with anything.

[Ghostpanther]

Ah yes, of course, the people who commit the acts lionized by the NRA are reporting them to the NRA, not the police. Gotcha.

Like I said, if some people will not believe a report commissioned by a liberal President, no matter what you say, they will reject it. The great majority of those incidents are not being reported to anyone, unless they are asked about their own gun deterrent/self defense stories. I have some myself, but those will mean nothing to you.

- - - Updated - - -

Our founding fathers had no idea of the kind of weapons we would have today or the kind of sick twisted individuals that would freely be able to acquire them. The 2nd amendment is dated and is all wrong for the times.

No one actually needs a gun. People killed people long before guns ever got created. So the idea that people have the right to have a gun has never made sense to me. They are not necessary on any level. You want to hunt? Break out the bow and some knives. Kill things with your hands for crying out loud.

It will be a great day for America when we wake up and realize our founding fathers lived in a different world and the same rules no longer apply. Simple as that! Oh and guns are not a tool for self defense. You shouldn't be in a position to need one but that is an entirely different problem.

So all the other rights we have in the Constitution are outdated?

[sarahtasher]

Like I said, if some people will not believe a report commissioned by a liberal President, no matter what you say, they will reject it. The great majority of those incidents are not being reported to anyone, unless they are asked about their own gun deterrent/self defense stories. I have some myself, but those will mean nothing to you.

- - - Updated - - -



So all the other rights we have in the Constitution are outdated?

If you have stories with a precise person, time and place, then they are relevant. However, again, if we are to consider that the NRA argument is remotely true, you would need to find 550 of those stories PER DAY

[lockedout]

I disagree with that. I think if society in general push's and enforces certain types of laws it could be effective in reducing gun violence in general and mass shooting's probably to a lesser extent. Something like I outlined would just take time to do this since nothing ever happens immediately when you are trying to force behavior changes on a large segment of the population. 99 percent of gun owners are responsible, and probably would be for something like this because they know that it should be expected of them in the first place. While those who don't follow the law will eventually have to replace some part on there gun, show up with it not being registered or try to purchase it without registration of the type of weapon its for and then have there guns confiscated because they can't follow a simple law. The way it would work is that if you owned a gun prior to mandatory registration, you are not required to register it until you HAVE to replace a component on the gun. Then it is required when you try and purchase that component that the gun its for be registered. Failing to do so will instantly result in forfeiture of all firearms and charges being brought. If found guilty you won't get your guns back and you will no longer have the right to own any firearms for a set amount of time and your guns will be sold for scrap. Now yes guns will be out there, they will exist and people will still die to gun violence, but it will steadily decline because it reinforces certain types of behavior so it will happen less and less in general because its habit forming. And also the mental health aspect will take guns out of the hands of people who never ever should have owned them in the first place. It might take a decade or two for it to be effective because of the absurd amount of guns in the country but it will work because once guns are tracked, it will be harder and harder to purchase them on the black market because of parts requirement to keep them operational and the risks involved in not following the law will cause a tightening in that market to push those the costs higher.

Most of these school shootings were done with legally owned albeit poorly stored firearms. How does your suggestion stop that?

[Ghostpanther]

Not really, the constitution does not state that you have a right to a gun. It states you have the right to have arms. Its a distinction that keeps getting misunderstood time and again. The constitution is a living document and reflects on what the current society prevailing views are on what constitutes necessary self protection. Don't get me wrong, I actually do support the ability to own pretty much any type of firearm you want. Up to even an m60's with proper background checks and documentation. But at the same time please understand also that things can and do change with time to what bearing arms actually means. And I fully support background checks and requirements to own any type of weapon. Someone should be of sound mind to own a firearm. That should be a requirement in order to obtain one. And all firearms should be tracked by the government, and if someone sells a weapon to someone else they should be required to report this transaction. And for those that fail to do so they should have the right to own firearms taken away permanently. And sent to prison. Right now the biggest issue we have is who keeps getting these weapons and misusing them. After a few years we can then look back and decide if something more needs to be done. As for the suggestion that its not practical to do anything I suggested. Give it time, gun's break down all the time, they require parts to replace different triggers, barrels wear down etc, if we enforce the ability to have it necessary to always have documentation when replacing those parts it will reduce the amount of guns getting into criminals hands and for those who never should own a gun in the first place due to there mental capacity. And hopefully drive down gun related death's. Right now it's to habitual the way guns are traded around and lost in the system and falling into the wrong hands. More strict enforcement should be necessary. As for how difficult it is to determine if they are of sound mind. My response would be first and foremost, have they been reported as having any type of antisocial psychotic behavior. Have they been convicted of a violent crime. And finally those people who are seeing psychologists or psychiatrist and those professionals have a concern about those individuals being dangerous to society to own any type of weapon should be required to have a hearing to determine whether or not they are of sound mind to own a weapon of any type. A lot of these laws are also actually on the book in various places but the enforcement is lacking. Just my opinion.

Arms in the Constitution has been always understood to mean firearms.

And as a suggestion, try to break up a long post with some separate lines between points. Makes it easier to read your posts than when you have your whole post all lumped up together.

- - - Updated - - -

If you have stories with a precise person, time and place, then they are relevant. However, again, if we are to consider that the NRA argument is remotely true, you would need to find 550 of those stories PER DAY

Like I said before and those studies have also shown, we will never know the exact number of times. Bloomberg link I provided I think made some good points and the number is higher than you will accept. But the overall result of the studies showed that having a firearm for self defense can be a deterrent and successful tool for self defense. That is really all that matters in this discussion. If you choose not to use one, then fine. Your decision.

[lockedout]

Like I said before and those studies have also shown, we will never know the exact number of times. Bloomberg link I provided I think made some good points and the number is higher than you will accept. But the overall result of the studies showed that having a firearm for self defense can be a deterrent and successful tool for self defense. That is really all that matters in this discussion. If you choose not to use one, then fine. Your decision.

Some of the time when someone who stops a crime by brandishing a firearm doesn't want to bring the police into it if it isn't necessary.

[zenkai]

Like I said before and those studies have also shown, we will never know the exact number of times. Bloomberg link I provided I think made some good points and the number is higher than you will accept. But the overall result of the studies showed that having a firearm for self defense can be a deterrent and successful tool for self defense. That is really all that matters in this discussion. If you choose not to use one, then fine. Your decision.

I read a good story about how do you report a crime that didn't happen, I will have to see if I can dig it up.

Reminds me of a friend of mine, his father worked in a bad part of town and one night he was working late and had to stop and get gas. While he was getting gas a car pulls up and 4 men get out and started walking toward him. Friend's father reaches under his seat as if he was going for a firearm (he was unarmed), they turned around and walked back to their car and drove off. Ever since then he carries a firearm in his car.

[Ghostpanther]

Some of the time when someone who stops a crime by brandishing a firearm doesn't want to bring the police into it if it isn't necessary.

True. In some states, brandishing a firearm is considered a crime if there is no actual attack. Not reporting such, can mean less chances of the one defending themselves to be charged with something. Ohio however, has no brandishing a firearm law as such. Here it is perfectly legal to put your hand on your weapon and warn someone, you are armed and will defend yourself.

[lockedout]

True. In some states, banishing a firearm is considered a crime if there is no actual attack. Not reporting such, can mean less chances of the one defending themselves to be charged with something. Ohio however, has no banishing a firearm law as such. Here it is perfectly legal to put your hand on your weapon and warn someone, you are armed and will defend yourself.

I hope the firearm isn't banished, lol.

[Ghostpanther]

I read a good story about how do you report a crime that didn't happen, I will have to see if I can dig it up.

Reminds me of a friend of mine, his father worked in a bad part of town and one night he was working late and had to stop and get gas. While he was getting gas a car pulls up and 4 men get out and started walking toward him. Friend's father reaches under his seat as if he was going for a firearm (he was unarmed), they turned around and walked back to their car and drove off. Ever since then he carries a firearm in his car.

Good story.

My uncle was driving thru a large city in Ohio several years back and he was being harassed by several young punks in another car and when they pulled up next to him at a stop light, he placed his .38 revolver on the dashboard and the instant they saw that, they sped away and that ended that confrontation. At the time, it was a crime in Ohio to have a loaded firearm in your car even if you did have a permit for one. So no way was he going to report that incident.

I remember the time when we lived in a rough high crime area of Cleveland and one night, a criminal was trying to break into our apt and my dad yelled out to my mother real loud, " Get the gun!!! " and that stopped the attempted break in. He had no firearm. Of course it was never reported.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope the firearm isn't banished, lol.

lol. Ok Ms English teacher.

[lockedout]

Good story.

My uncle was driving thru a large city in Ohio several years back and he was being harassed by several young punks in another car and when they pulled up next to him at a stop light, he placed his .38 revolver on the dashboard and the instant they saw that, they sped away and that ended that confrontation. At the time, it was a crime in Ohio to have a loaded firearm in your car even if you did have a permit for one. So no way was he going to report that incident.

I remember the time when we lived in a rough high crime area of Cleveland and one night, a criminal was trying to break into our apt and my dad yelled out to my mother real loud, " Get the gun!!! " and that stopped the attempted break in. He had no firearm. Of course it was never reported.

- - - Updated - - -



lol. Ok Ms English teacher.

That's the thing people don't want to report those type of incidents.
Also I was only joking.

[zenkai]

I just want to take a quick moment to LOL.

School that gives students rocks to repel active shooter to add armed security

[Ghostpanther]

That's the thing people don't want to report those type of incidents.
Also I was only joking.

Exactly. But the anti-gunners want only reported cases of such, and even if they were, they would find some way to try to distort the truth to fit their narrative of more gun control. Such as lumping in suicides into the gun deaths, when those represent 61% of the causes of gun deaths. Without those, their numbers are lower and pale in comparison to other preventable cause of deaths.

And it is ok. I was not offended. I edited my page. Thanks for the observation.

[Stormdash]

I hope the firearm isn't banished, lol.

thankfully, contrary to a lot of hyperventilating rhetoric, your gun cannot be banished as it is not classified as a demon.

[misterpuk]

Not really, the constitution does not state that you have a right to a gun. ..........................

Per the Supreme Court's decision, it does.

See District of Columbia v. Heller

The Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes,

[Ghostpanther]

I just want to take a quick moment to LOL.

School that gives students rocks to repel active shooter to add armed security

Lol. I saw that the other day and I admit I laughed pretty hard. Doing that will only make the rock throwers the main targets. And there has to be the point of " Do not bring rocks to a gun fight." :P

- - - Updated - - -

thankfully, contrary to a lot of hyperventilating rhetoric, your gun cannot be banished as it is not classified as a demon.

ROFL. Good one.

[baskev]

Other countries do not have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Which is the major reasons they were able to get by with their gun control measures and laws.

Yeah. I am all for banning bumpstocks. Congress should draft a law redefining what constitutes a modification which allows a semi-auto rifle mimic full auto fire. Which would ban bumpstocks or any similar item.

Yes you are right...but people can still fire them for pleasure/hunting if they want to ( with the right permits). They can still own them as display pieces.
But this whole discussion about guns ( not ours) is about either removing guns complete, or arming everyone from teacher to toddlers.

[Ghostpanther]

Yes you are right...but people can still fire them for pleasure/hunting if they want to ( with the right permits). They can still own them as display pieces.
But this whole discussion about guns ( not ours) is about either removing guns complete, or arming everyone from teacher to toddlers.

Not seen anyone on here advocating arming toddlers. lol! Teachers should have the option to carry a firearm concealed to classes, if the school district approves of such and they get the required training and license. Several schools across the nation already do allow it. Over 40 schools in Ohio do.

[baskev]

I see three main effective arguments that gun rights' advocates use:

1. Can't remove all the guns.
2. You can't judge or punish people based on the actions of others and people shouldn't have to sacrifice their rights because someone else abuses theirs.
3. What's changed over the past 20 years that there is more gun violence with the same (or better) gun regulations.

All of these are legitimate points that need to not only be addressed, but considered while legislating new gun control regulations. I am the first to admit that I do not have all the answers.

1.) yup. And they are right. You can ban all guns. But there are so many guns in america...good luck.
2.) i disagree with them on this. Because a good group of people use narcotics without problems. So with their definition drugs should be used by everyone.
3.) My answer : How people think. from a semi insider/mostly outside look. America ( not all americans and every part of the country) has become more jaded. You are either left or right. Pro or Anti. Being nice is not okay. We love to blame everyone else for our problems but not ourselves. And we belief to much crap, ghosts, flat earth etc etc. If its on fox news, cnn , facebook etc its real.