Anti-gun nonsense

[Liquid Cobra]

Well I guess it's standard operating procedure at this point. A tragedy happens, people want to feel safe and like they're making a difference so they start talking about a gun ban. Happens every time. I keep reading posts about how Australia has gotten rid of this problem by banning guns and how they haven't had a mass shooting since 1996. The problem with that statement is it isn't true. I just don't know why these people think it's such a simple solution. Ban the guns and the problem will go away. Here in Canada we have access to almost all the same firearms as our American friends but we don't have this problem nearly as often. I just think there are more variable contributing to this than the availability of firearms. Why wasn't this an issue 30 years ago? Guns were the same then as they are now.

Sorry (my Canadian is showing) but I had to vent. Thanks for reading. Feel free to comment. Lets keep it civil.

[Pinetreebbs]

Australia just converted their, "gun problem" into an underground submachine gun manufacturing problem for criminals and a total loss of freedom for law abiding gun owners.

Excellent point about 30 years ago. The non islamic related shooters get off on their fifteen minutes of fame. The shooters and news media are do-dependent, one feeding the other. Thirty years ago we didn't have the Internet and several competing 24 hour news channels looking for ratings that we have today.

As to your question, why the US and not Canada, I believe we are targeted because we cannot quit meddling in other countries business.

[paladin]

"The only thing that stops a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun."

The argument against this is that armed "good guy" civvies wind up getting themselves <or innocent bystanders> killed trying to subdue the murderous devils.

Maybe I'm in the minority thinking this-- but I'd honestly rest easier knowing a loved one died <accidentally> by someone trying to help

than I would if that same loved one got slaughtered wholesale by a monster while otherwise able bodied folks could only helplessly cower, run, watch, or worse yet, become victims themselves....so sad, then the sadness eventually gives place to anger....

I would die a 1,000 x over knowing something could have been done BY ME WITH A GUN ...better to die just once trying to take out the devil.

[Blerv]

If you can't change the people you can restrict the ability to buy guns (easy) or eliminate them all-together (very hard).

Since the NRA is always lobbying for nothing to be changed it's just a matter of time until more severe actions are taken. They didn't even bat an eye at Sandy Hook. Frankly, as a person who likes guns, can easily meet any restrictions placed, and hates mass shootings...I think it would be wise of them (NRA) to compromise sooner than later.

Currently it's easier to get a gun than a drivers license. Over 30 people are murdered every day in the USA. The majority of those are suicides. Do you think we should do anything different or just keep leading the world in these statistics?

[SpyderEdgeForever]

I am with you all on the pro gun pro knife pro individual freedom and anti collectivist stuff. My point is this, Blerv and all:

1 You cannot change the people.
2 Restricting the guns and weapons is wrong and against individual freedom.

Part of my answer I will post here is this:

1 Better to err on the side of freedom and take the risk of a world with horrible tragedies like mass shootings, than try to micro manage and overly control people. That is part of what comes with freedom, in a world where people are not perfect.

For example: I believe the TSA should repeal all anti knife laws and let citizens carry guns, knives, swords, machetes, you name it, on all airlines and airplane rides, rather than restrict people.

The governments could also openly tell responsible citizens to be armed and to do what they have to do to cut down and stop those who are attacking others.

Example: The President should go on international television and say "My fellow Americans. I hereby declare that you have the right to keep and bear arms as our Constitution says, and I personally encourage you to be armed to the teeth for self defense. If you see someone about to commit a mass shooting or attack others, take them down, cut them down, do whatever is necessary to defend yourselves and your fellow Americans."

And I will also add this: While there were no "good old days" in the recorded post Edenic history, and each and every time and place has its "bad guys", the fact stands: In the American past, while you had the outlaws who assaulted people, it was easier and cheaper to buy and own guns and knives and weaponry, with less restrictive laws, and yet you did not have mass shootings and school shootings and these things, as a major problem. Citizens knew and had the ability and the legal confidence to cut down such attackers before it got out of hand.

[Doc Dan]

Let's recap...In the last day and a half we have seen our President blame the American people for what that nut job did, plus say that guns are a problem. We have seen the ACLU blame Christians for the massacre and where that lunacy came from only the devil knows. We have seen the liberal politicians blame the Second Amendment. The LGBTQRST community is blaming right wing conservatives. In fact, all of these nut jobs are blaming everything and everybody except the one that did the dastardly deed.

[Blerv]

Just another disclaimer as it seems I'm in the minority here (while about 50% of the overall population on the topic)...

I'm not ANTI-GUN, I'm ANTI-PEOPLE. Not much faith in humanity at all, frankly. Historically we are violent, selfish, and are able to justify the most heinous acts with the oddest of criteria. Birth-right, race, religion, greed, really...find something you want to do and then reverse construct the weakest reasoning possible.

I'm all for rights but guns are extremely easy to obtain and those tools provide easy access to take away another person's rights with the squeeze of a trigger. Since the largest mass shooting ever on USA soil happened very recently to a group of already oppressed individuals I'm really not in the mood to pander to the John Wayne aficionados. If it was your brother, sister, mother, father, or spouse who was killed would you be at all interested in trying to limit access to guns to nutjobs?

I adore cars. If it became trendy to run them into buildings, jump sidewalks, and intentionally kill people with them. I would be the first person to agree and make them harder to obtain. Run my credit, make the license more expensive, perform a background search on me...I've got nothing to hide and the money to burn for my hobby.

[Liquid Cobra]

If you can't change the people you can restrict the ability to buy guns (easy) or eliminate them all-together (very hard).

Since the NRA is always lobbying for nothing to be changed it's just a matter of time until more severe actions are taken. They didn't even bat an eye at Sandy Hook. Frankly, as a person who likes guns, can easily meet any restrictions placed, and hates mass shootings...I think it would be wise of them (NRA) to compromise sooner than later.

Currently it's easier to get a gun than a drivers license. Over 30 people are murdered every day in the USA. The majority of those are suicides. Do you think we should do anything different or just keep leading the world in these statistics?

The NRA stands it's ground because they are very aware of the slippery slope. They know that the other sides actual goal is a complete ban. If the NRA conceded to a registry or something this week, the other side will just say that's not good enough next week and will ask for further restrictions until firearms are banned. We've seen this exact thing play out over and over all over the world.

As far as suicides go the number of suicides don't go down once firearms are banned. The method of suicide just changes. Guns don't cause suicides.

[Liquid Cobra]

Just another disclaimer as it seems I'm in the minority here (while about 50% of the overall population on the topic)...

I'm not ANTI-GUN, I'm ANTI-PEOPLE. Not much faith in humanity at all, frankly. Historically we are violent, selfish, and are able to justify the most heinous acts with the oddest of criteria. Birth-right, race, religion, greed, really...find something you want to do and then reverse construct the weakest reasoning possible.

I'm all for rights but guns are extremely easy to obtain and those tools provide easy access to take away another person's rights with the squeeze of a trigger. Since the largest mass shooting ever on USA soil happened very recently to a group of already oppressed individuals I'm really not in the mood to pander to the John Wayne aficionados. If it was your brother, sister, mother, father, or spouse who was killed would you be at all interested in trying to limit access to guns to nutjobs?

I adore cars. If it became trendy to run them into buildings, jump sidewalks, and intentionally kill people with them. I would be the first person to agree and make them harder to obtain. Run my credit, make the license more expensive, perform a background search on me...I've got nothing to hide and the money to burn for my hobby.

My brother was an alcoholic and died as such. I don't blame alcohol for his passing and I don't want it banned because of what happened to him. I'm certain if someone close to me died because of the actions of another person with a firearm I wouldn't call for some arbitrary law to make me feel better.

It's certainly an interesting conversation.

[Blerv]

If you can't change the people you can restrict the ability to buy guns (easy) or eliminate them all-together (very hard).

Since the NRA is always lobbying for nothing to be changed it's just a matter of time until more severe actions are taken. They didn't even bat an eye at Sandy Hook. Frankly, as a person who likes guns, can easily meet any restrictions placed, and hates mass shootings...I think it would be wise of them (NRA) to compromise sooner than later.

Currently it's easier to get a gun than a drivers license. Over 30 people are murdered every day in the USA. The majority of those are suicides. Do you think we should do anything different or just keep leading the world in these statistics?

The NRA stands it's ground because they are very aware of the slippery slope. They know that the other sides actual goal is a complete ban. If the NRA conceded to a registry or something this week, the other side will just say that's not good enough next week and will ask for further restrictions until firearms are banned. We've seen this exact thing play out over and over all over the world.

As far as suicides go the number of suicides don't go down once firearms are banned. The method of suicide just changes. Guns don't cause suicides.

Ban-ban-ban. Always the fear of the ban. If someone wouldn't be hired at Subway they probably shouldn't have access to a gun. Maybe the NRA can figure out a way for that very easy thing to be accomplished.

I'm all for a reasoned discussion. The topic doesn't tend to generate those. 50 people get murdered and 50% of the population says, "Well, those things happen."

My brother was an alcoholic and died as such. I don't blame alcohol for his passing and I don't want it banned because of what happened to him. I'm certain if someone close to me died because of the actions of another person with a firearm I wouldn't call for some arbitrary law to make me feel better.

It's certainly an interesting conversation.

The suicide note was not that they should be banned (again, never said that) because it's an easy way to take your own life. It's a counter to the dark-fantasy that guns kill bad guys like 90%+ of the time. Typically set to one of those dramatic TV reenactments.

Lastly, and I mean it because nobody wants me to keep talking :D, the number of "mass shootings" we have in the USA is off the charts. I'm not sure the current count because the past two years have been BLOODY but here's a link from 2000-2014.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-leads-w ... 1443905359

USA = 133
Canada = 3

In 2013 the USA had 316.5m people while Canada had 35.16m people. Even if you multiply your factor by 10 times that only gives you a paltry 30 mass shootings.

[jmh58]

I don't think there will be a total ban on guns!! Ammo??? and the components??? John :)

[Liquid Cobra]

If you can't change the people you can restrict the ability to buy guns (easy) or eliminate them all-together (very hard).

Since the NRA is always lobbying for nothing to be changed it's just a matter of time until more severe actions are taken. They didn't even bat an eye at Sandy Hook. Frankly, as a person who likes guns, can easily meet any restrictions placed, and hates mass shootings...I think it would be wise of them (NRA) to compromise sooner than later.

Currently it's easier to get a gun than a drivers license. Over 30 people are murdered every day in the USA. The majority of those are suicides. Do you think we should do anything different or just keep leading the world in these statistics?

The NRA stands it's ground because they are very aware of the slippery slope. They know that the other sides actual goal is a complete ban. If the NRA conceded to a registry or something this week, the other side will just say that's not good enough next week and will ask for further restrictions until firearms are banned. We've seen this exact thing play out over and over all over the world.

As far as suicides go the number of suicides don't go down once firearms are banned. The method of suicide just changes. Guns don't cause suicides.

Ban-ban-ban. Always the fear of the ban. If someone wouldn't be hired at Subway they probably shouldn't have access to a gun. Maybe the NRA can figure out a way for that very easy thing to be accomplished.

I'm all for a reasoned discussion. The topic doesn't tend to generate those. 50 people get murdered and 50% of the population says, "Well, those things happen."

My brother was an alcoholic and died as such. I don't blame alcohol for his passing and I don't want it banned because of what happened to him. I'm certain if someone close to me died because of the actions of another person with a firearm I wouldn't call for some arbitrary law to make me feel better.

It's certainly an interesting conversation.

The suicide note was not that they should be banned (again, never said that) because it's an easy way to take your own life. It's a counter to the dark-fantasy that guns kill bad guys like 90%+ of the time. Typically set to one of those dramatic TV reenactments.

Lastly, and I mean it because nobody wants me to keep talking :D, the number of "mass shootings" we have in the USA is off the charts. I'm not sure the current count because the past two years have been BLOODY but here's a link from 2000-2014.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-leads-w ... 1443905359

USA = 133
Canada = 3

In 2013 the USA had 316.5m people while Canada had 35.16m people. Even if you multiply your factor by 10 times that only gives you a paltry 30 mass shootings.

So why doesn't Canada have this same problem? What do you think?

[Blerv]

So why doesn't Canada have this same problem? What do you think?

No clue but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. :)

Unfortunately, whatever is to blame here, we can't figure it out or choose not to address it. IMHO, it stems from much of our attitude and socioeconomic situation.
* Gun loving culture with fairly lax laws
* Promoters of confidence and bravado (we are #1!)
* Politically split between conservative and progressive
* Economically oppressed (our heros are billionaires who seem to hate us)
* Fairly uneducated - (math & science vs the world)

The first part isn't the problem. The rest is an interesting cocktail tho. Not everyone in the USA is full of angst, attitude, and lack of education. I spent 5 years in Canada at university and for some reason the countries just have radically different vibes.

People who hate guns and people who loves guns can agree one one thing: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. So...let's try together to keep that from happening less.

[OldHoosier62]

As a retired FFL (Federal Firearms License) dealer (approx. 30 years experience) I will weigh-in here.

1) This country stopped institutionalizing the mentally ill over 30 years ago. These folks now walk the streets and there is no way to differentiate between them and the "normal" folks in many/most cases.

2) A huge portion of the populace is HEAVILY medicated....anxiety meds, SSRIs, painkillers,, etc...Check the shooters out, almost all were either heavily medicated or were SUPPOSED to be per their doctors. Whether medicated, in withdrawal or simply "off their meds" due to believing they were fine and everyone else is screwed up....big problem. BTW- most were also registered, voting Democrats.

3) Suicides don't count...I've refuse to sell a firearm on three occasions in my life due to a gut feeling that something wasn't right...all three went ahead and killed themselves anyway.....1-suicide by cop, 1-poison and the 3rd by hanging. If they want to die they will find a way no matter what.

4) The biggest issue with the background check system we have now is proper reporting and system data entry....simply put, the local PD's aren't getting the info into the database to be acted upon. You can only flag a purchase if the info is their to give cause for the FBI to act on. Universal background checks WILL NOT fix that. Combine that with incorrect reporting that prevents law abiding folks from getting a firearm due to bureaucratic snafu, often taking months or years to get fully straightened out.

5) We are allowing our government to import people who openly hate us and our freedoms. Our immigration system is seriously broken.

Combine all of the above with the medias willful ignorance on the subject, fear mongering by politicians/media/useful-idiots, the slippery slope of mucking about with a Constitutionally guaranteed right...(remember boys and girls, if they change one "for the common good" that sets precedent for future tinkering and loss of more of our rights) and you have a recipe for a serious mess.

Remember folks...It ain't Gun Control, it's simply CONTROL. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc....all went after weapons first before the purges, re-education, slavery that murdered millions. Our government is not nearly as altruistic and benign as many here believe. They are already threatening lawsuits and jailtime/fines for openly stating your opinions....ie..hatespeech....if you disagree with their opinions they want to litigate you out of existence/relevance. If they can't win any other way they use the court system to ram it down our throats....Democrats AND Republicans are equally to blame.

ETA- To clarify, I am not saying that the .gov wants to march us off to the gulags but that in the last 25 or so years our .gov has acted not so much in the interest of her constituents but more in the interests of the politicians and bureaucrats that are trying to protect their jobs more than anything else.


OH62

btw- as of noon today I've had 11 phone calls from folks in the gay community (referred by a cliche gay interior decorator friend) asking about what firearms to buy for personal protection. People are starting to wake up to the fact that their safety is their own responsibility.

[ChrisinHove]

Disclaimer: I have no dog in this political fight, and the following is simply a well meaning contribution to the discussion.... Plus my support and condolences to any that may need it.

I really don't understand why the "freedom" not to be murdered by lunatics with assault weapons is of less importance to America than the "freedom" to own them.

Nonetheless: You're never going to get that genie back into the bottle as you have too many guns in circulation. WW1 and WW2 weapons still come to light here in the UK and we've had gun control, basically for ever. You might just have a chance by controlling the ammunition, though, if ever the lives of your own people become valuable enough to you.

[The Deacon]

For nearly 50 years, ever since the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, it has been illegal for a convicted felon, or anyone under indictment for a felony, a fugitive from justice, drug addict, anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, anyone who is the subject of an order of protection, anyone who has been dishonorably discharged from the armed forces, Illegal aliens, and legal aliens here on certain visas to purchase firearms. Hasn't stopped many of them.

Criminals, by definition do not obey the law and the systems by which information on indictments and convictions finds its way the the ATF has never been perfected. How well the military shares information regarding dishonorable discharges is questionable.

Mental health records are somewhat confidential, unless a person has show clear signs of being a danger to himself or others, and, like all other pertinent information, that which does exist is not always sent to or processed by the ATF.

12 states allow illegals to have drivers licenses, how are gun shops in those states suppose to determine if they are legal? How many in those states and elsewhere have children, born here and old enough to buy a gun for papa?

Why does anyone think more laws are going to change anything when the ones we have do not work.

As for suicides, I'll take the guy who offs himself with a gun over the one who drives head on into a car full of innocents any day.

[The Deacon]

Disclaimer: I have no dog in this political fight, and the following is simply a well meaning contribution to the discussion.... Plus my support and condolences to any that may need it.

I really don't understand why the "freedom" not to be murdered by lunatics with assault weapons is of less importance to America than the "freedom" to own them.

Nonetheless: You're never going to get that genie back into the bottle as you have too many guns in circulation. WW1 and WW2 weapons still come to light here in the UK and we've had gun control, basically for ever. You might just have a chance by controlling the ammunition, though, if ever the lives of your own people become valuable enough to you.

It's the price we pay for both the right defend ourselves against such lunatics and the right to own the means with which to do so. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

EDITED TO ADD: And, for the record, very few crimes in the US are committed with "assault weapons". Almost all the firearms the press mislabels as assault weapons are semi-automatic rifles, not full automatic.

[Liquid Cobra]

Disclaimer: I have no dog in this political fight, and the following is simply a well meaning contribution to the discussion.... Plus my support and condolences to any that may need it.

I really don't understand why the "freedom" not to be murdered by lunatics with assault weapons is of less importance to America than the "freedom" to own them.

Nonetheless: You're never going to get that genie back into the bottle as you have too many guns in circulation. WW1 and WW2 weapons still come to light here in the UK and we've had gun control, basically for ever. You might just have a chance by controlling the ammunition, though, if ever the lives of your own people become valuable enough to you.

I assume "freedom not to be murdered by lunatics with assault weapons" implies regulating or gettin rid of them. How can you suggest such a thing and then say in the next paragraph that it will do no good? Then what's the point? Bad people are going to do bad things. Good people shouldn't be punished because of it. And please, refrain from using the term assault rifle. It's just a rifle.

[ChrisinHove]

Disclaimer: I have no dog in this political fight, and the following is simply a well meaning contribution to the discussion.... Plus my support and condolences to any that may need it.

I really don't understand why the "freedom" not to be murdered by lunatics with assault weapons is of less importance to America than the "freedom" to own them.

Nonetheless: You're never going to get that genie back into the bottle as you have too many guns in circulation. WW1 and WW2 weapons still come to light here in the UK and we've had gun control, basically for ever. You might just have a chance by controlling the ammunition, though, if ever the lives of your own people become valuable enough to you.

I assume "freedom not to be murdered by lunatics with assault weapons" implies regulating or gettin rid of them. How can you suggest such a thing and then say in the next paragraph that it will do no good? Then what's the point? Bad people are going to do bad things. Good people shouldn't be punished because of it. And please, refrain from using the term assault rifle. It's just a rifle.

I admit I know nothing of rifle variants - but I actually wrote "assault weapon" not "assault rifle". There is plainly a difference between hunting rifles and weapons that the military would utilise, though.

You jumped to the conclusion that I'm advocating gun control, and then complain that it contradicts the rest of my post where I say I don't think it achievable. If I had meant to write in support of gun control, that's what I would have written.

My point was that there is more to the concept of "freedom" than any individual just getting what they want.

Paul's response was honest. Mass shootings are the price US society is willing to pay so people can own weapons.

We don't have much gun ownership in the UK and I'm happy with that because I never fear getting shot, I never fear opening my front door to strangers, or at night. I am not "free" to own or carry a gun (but could theoretically own one under very strict licensing and control circumstances) but we are probably at least as "free" here than virtually any other country in the world from the fear - and actuality - of gun crime. And as a result I don't need a gun to protect my family from it.

[Blerv]

(I said I would back out but...meh)

Why does the gun community always want the people who are rabidly against them to come up with the answers? Isn't the onus on the supporters to provide a solution so they can keep selling and enjoying their kill-tools? :confused:

Ok fine. Government subsidy for purchase of Kevlar vests with 2" titanium plates woven in. The titanium is more expensive than steel but necessary for all those toddlers.