The Onion is really going in after this Vegas thing..
Options
Replies
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
Mental health care in this country is atrocious...it's definitely something that needs to be addressed in regards to this kind of gun violence. Someone who shoots into a crowd randomly isn't right in the head.
Mental health care in general needs to be addressed...but maybe have some kind of mental health evaluation done as part of the process of gun ownership as well...we do it for eyes and driving.
I don't disagree with any of this....except that a certain group of people use "mental health" as a distraction to avoid talking about ANY kind of gun control.
Meanwhile, those very same people throw parties (yes literally) when they succeed in eroding mental health care. This isn't rhetorical or sarcastic, it actually happened, earlier this year.0 -
beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
more gun control, better mental health care, literally anything else to reduce deaths by gunshot and incidences of mass shooting.
I'm all for it. All of them, any of them. Whatever works, whatever might work, whatever we can try to see if it works.
enough is enough.cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
Mental health care in this country is atrocious...it's definitely something that needs to be addressed in regards to this kind of gun violence. Someone who shoots into a crowd randomly isn't right in the head.
Mental health care in general needs to be addressed...but maybe have some kind of mental health evaluation done as part of the process of gun ownership as well...we do it for eyes and driving.
Here now I agree. People are so quick to jump up and just say “ban the guns, regulate the guns!” And they don’t address that there are so many other contributing factors to acts like this that need to be overhauled and addressed. That was the point I was trying to make. Thanks for the discussion.
I've never met or talked to a single gun control advocate, even the most ardent "gun grabber" who didn't ALSO want mental health care to be improved. Not a single one. Ever.1 -
In the mid 90s 36 Australians (including children?were killed in a mass shooting at Port Arthur, a Tasmanian tourist destination.
I'm the following months and years Oz saw sweeping gun reforms and buy back/amnesty.
We haven't had a mass shooting since.
Not one.
That's not to say it will never happen again. However, changes in legislation and public attitudes to gun ownership/use have certainly played a part in 20 years without a mass shooting occurring in this country.
..........
There is a rising gun culture in some parts of the country with an increase in gun violence. Australia is currently running another gun amnesty where people can hand in unwanted or unregistered weapons without prosecution.
Gun buy back programs are a common occurrence in almost every major city in the US (regulated at the city level, not the federal level). They have done very little to solve any problems with the gun culture here in Cincinnati, the city where I live.0 -
beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
more gun control, better mental health care, literally anything else to reduce deaths by gunshot and incidences of mass shooting.
I'm all for it. All of them, any of them. Whatever works, whatever might work, whatever we can try to see if it works.
enough is enough.
Mental health care is not spoken much about in this country. So many people who go on with their day and no one knows the battles they are fighting with-in. I've come across a man a year or two ago, he'd show up at my house and talk crazy talk. I had to call the cops on him multiple times because I was scared he was going to hurt me and my kids. Some mental issues are more visible than others and the ones that are less visible are the most dangerous, that's my opinion at least. So I agree with you on at.1 -
beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
more gun control, better mental health care, literally anything else to reduce deaths by gunshot and incidences of mass shooting.
I'm all for it. All of them, any of them. Whatever works, whatever might work, whatever we can try to see if it works.
enough is enough.
Mental health care is not spoken much about in this country. So many people who go on with their day and no one knows the battles they are fighting with-in. I've come across a man a year or two ago, he'd show up at my house and talk crazy talk. I had to call the cops on him multiple times because I was scared he was going to hurt me and my kids. Some mental issues are more visible than others and the ones that are less visible are the most dangerous, that's my opinion at least. So I agree with you on at.
USA has the highest % of antidepressant users
0 -
beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
more gun control, better mental health care, literally anything else to reduce deaths by gunshot and incidences of mass shooting.
I'm all for it. All of them, any of them. Whatever works, whatever might work, whatever we can try to see if it works.
enough is enough.
Mental health care is not spoken much about in this country. So many people who go on with their day and no one knows the battles they are fighting with-in. I've come across a man a year or two ago, he'd show up at my house and talk crazy talk. I had to call the cops on him multiple times because I was scared he was going to hurt me and my kids. Some mental issues are more visible than others and the ones that are less visible are the most dangerous, that's my opinion at least. So I agree with you on at.
USA has the highest % of antidepressant users
You can get those at your regular doctor visits.0 -
beingmore1 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »beingmore1 wrote: »
Yes this is true, I can’t see how it would be hurtful to any lawful abiding gun owners. However. As stated previously it’s gonna do jack squat for the “bad guy” or “crazy guy” who doesn’t follow the law anyways. If this guy wanted to kill a lot of people, like another poster mentioned, he didn’t need to use guns. As we see with the suicide bombers who use buckets and nails to make bombs....they find a way. Should hardware stores be more regulated?cwolfman13 wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »@browneyedgirl749 wrote: »To a certain extent, I do believe there should be stricter gun laws. In VA, it is not required you register a fire arm. I did, however, when I got mine, because I will be taking the class to get my conceal carry permit. The law can be stricter by making all gun owners register their guns.
Law makers can pass as many laws as they want about getting stricter gun laws, but as I said, and many others said, if people want a gun, they'll get it, legally or illegally. And people are smart. They can ban automatic weapons, but people will figure out how to turn a semi automatic into an automatic. It's the same way as people making home made bombs with simple cleaning supplies. Evil people will go to extra lengths to pull off events like this.
Here is the argument against that (not saying its right or wrong): Why would the gov't want a list of all gun owners? What purpose would that serve? It is so they track who they consider a threat? Who might resist a change in gov't?
Like I said before, I'm a gun owner...so I'm definitely not in the ban guns camp...but I think licensing and registration makes sense. Will it prevent anything from happening ever again? Of course not...no law or regulation can do that...but we still have laws and regulations.
I think registration could have advantages...like someone getting stopped or otherwise somehow involved with the police and has a gun and the police finds that individual in violation of the law because it's not registered...he might be just some guy that didn't register is gun...or he could be some evil POS who had bigger plans that were thwarted because he was caught with an unregistered gun.
I think it would be beneficial in tracking firearms...where did it come from and who was the last registered owner...this would also dissuade people from illegal gun sales and/or make them more responsible in making sure they report lost or stolen guns to the proper authorities. Any transfer would require a re-registration by the new owner...and a transfer of title or something from the seller to CYA incase the new owner isn't so responsible.
I would think a renewal process would need to be in place with another round of background checks, etc...it would be nice if they could include mental health background check, but that would likely be a HIPAA.
I would think registration would also deter "straw purchases"
IDK...these seem like common sense things to me. Not going to solve all of the problems of course, but there's more of a deterrence...it's way easier to go buy a gun than it is to buy and operate a motor vehicle...which seems weird to me.
Like I said, it doesn't fix everything...but it's much more of a deterrent and it would help law enforcement more easily track illegal weapons and help determine where they originated and how they got into the wrong hands.
Yes, there will always be crazies...but regulations can mitigate and deter and make things more difficult for the crazies and criminals...as it is, they have it pretty friggin' easy. Just saying do nothing because there are crazies out there anyway doesn't make sense to me...why have any laws at all if we're just going to chalk it up to there will be people who don't follow the law.
Other countries have more stringent gun regulations and don't have the insane number of mass shootings and murder by gun that we have in the States.
Good points. But the illegal stuff that’s out there isn’t going to be reported or trackable or preventable by Tom GoodCitizen filling out more forms. More regulation will certainly my help them track better what they have. Or to know that Tom’s gun was stolen then used in a shooting spree. So I see the point in having gun owners be more regulated. It’s a good thing. But I hope others see the point that it’s not the be all end all of this issue. It’s just not that black and white of an issue.
framing ANY gun control regulation as nothing able to end ALL gun crime is the oldest trick in the book. One that I don't put an ounce of stock in.
Traffic laws don't stop all car accidents, but they reduce them significantly.
OSHA regulations don't stop all workplace deaths, but they reduce them significantly
Food safety laws don't stop all deaths from food poisoning....
you see where this is going?
I simply said that I see more gun control as a good thing however it must still be recognized that it is not the ONLY thing. Maybe you don’t see the point. Seems like it is a black or white issue for you. Better Gun control is part of the answer but certainly by no means the only answer. However many people choose to think with blinders on, on both sides of the argument and refuse to listen to others opinions. This gets all of us nowhere.
more gun control, better mental health care, literally anything else to reduce deaths by gunshot and incidences of mass shooting.
I'm all for it. All of them, any of them. Whatever works, whatever might work, whatever we can try to see if it works.
enough is enough.
Mental health care is not spoken much about in this country. So many people who go on with their day and no one knows the battles they are fighting with-in. I've come across a man a year or two ago, he'd show up at my house and talk crazy talk. I had to call the cops on him multiple times because I was scared he was going to hurt me and my kids. Some mental issues are more visible than others and the ones that are less visible are the most dangerous, that's my opinion at least. So I agree with you on at.
USA has the highest % of antidepressant users
Korea really needs to get with the program.
They need to jump on the team and come on in for the big win.4 -
SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »Chicago has strict gun laws
But Indiana doesn't, which pretty much completely renders Chicago's laws pointless. Local gun regulation will always be pointless when jurisdictions with lax laws are an hour away
In a similar way (albeit illegally) Mexico would render very strict gun control laws in the US pointless. Outlawing something that people really want creates a lucrative black market, and they would come across the southern border just like drugs.
It looks like the maniac that did this lead a very quiet, conventional. law-abiding life for 64 years, and he had the type of background suitable for owning weapons. Something changed him, and his actions in accumulating an arsenal following this change has to be uncovered. The rapid stockpiling of guns and ammo should have alerted someone in his life, whether friends, family, or gun/ammo sales outlets, unless he did this so methodically and carefully that he didn't trigger anyone's suspicion, which would be incredible.0 -
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »I don't live in the United States. I live in Canada where these are the rules on owning a gun:
Canada has a ban on assault rifles and "military" style firearms like the AK 47. A firearm license is required for other guns. A safety test must be taken, and a third person character reference must be obtained.
There is a mandatory background check which includes "criminal, mental health, addiction, and domestic violence records," notes the Library of Congress. Licensing and registration is handled on the national level and must be renewed every five years.
Now, I don't think I know a single person who owns a gun, other than the rare few that own a firearm to go hunting with. That's it. So please realize that I am coming from a place where the concept of owning a gun is very foreign to me.
So, I have two questions for the Americans who don't want stricter gun laws:
1. Do you think the above regulations are stupid and if you do, why?
And please, do not use the argument of "well, if normal people don't have guns then only the criminals will" because that's just not true - from what I understand no one has any intention of taking away the guns purchased for protection, and please also don't use the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people," because if you truly believe this then we should have no regulations on how to obtain a driver's license or anything else of that nature because "cars don't kill people, people kill people."
2. Do you disagree with the notion that civilians shouldn't own "military" style firearms? And if you do, why?
In my last office, we had 12 people working there.
Of the 12, 8 carried a concealed firearm on their body at all times and I believe most of them also had a firearm (or two) in their car too.
Anyone wanting to walk thru the front door with bad intent would have had a very, very bad day.0 -
There is no solution. sadly. its not the gun that fires itself, its not the box van that drives itself into the crowd of people, its not child that seeks the abuse of a parent or loved one. Somehow we want to navigate to the innocent parts of the equation because we are pressured for the an action..
Its the people that are the problem. and people aren't born adults. they are children that should be raised by loving stable and compassionate parents. preferably two..a mom and dad. yep..i said it. felt like everyone's opinion could be voiced so why not mine.
Maybe now and then...there is the totally random well balanced individual that just "snaps", but my gut tells me that parents...good mature responsible parents...would help a great deal in just raising mini adults into less violent and unstable large adults.
if you cut all the crap........and this was alluded to earlier with the notion that gun laws are more strict today than 30 or more years ago...yet violent guns crimes are worse....I also submit that the decline of the family is a far greater factor than most would ever consider....cuz after all...don't us parents have the right to divorce...and to have sex...and to do whatever we want.....we're ADULTS.. right... this is a much harder pill to swallow...could it be me that is actually to blame to the horrific crime 20 years into the future..... As a parent...my greatest responsibility is to raise my 16yr son to be respectful to his mother, his father, the kids he associates and that girl friend or two that will wonder into his life. its MY responsibility to ensure he respects life...all life. yes, we are hunters...we respect the animal we hunt...we take responsible actions in choosing to fire or not fire...we talk about it...not some other 16yr old friend...Me...Dad. He and I talk...about life and the events that unfold around us in the world.
If i was forced to select the culprit here......i'd have to say the decline of the family. that is the issue.5 -
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »I don't live in the United States. I live in Canada where these are the rules on owning a gun:
Canada has a ban on assault rifles and "military" style firearms like the AK 47. A firearm license is required for other guns. A safety test must be taken, and a third person character reference must be obtained.
There is a mandatory background check which includes "criminal, mental health, addiction, and domestic violence records," notes the Library of Congress. Licensing and registration is handled on the national level and must be renewed every five years.
Now, I don't think I know a single person who owns a gun, other than the rare few that own a firearm to go hunting with. That's it. So please realize that I am coming from a place where the concept of owning a gun is very foreign to me.
So, I have two questions for the Americans who don't want stricter gun laws:
1. Do you think the above regulations are stupid and if you do, why?
And please, do not use the argument of "well, if normal people don't have guns then only the criminals will" because that's just not true - from what I understand no one has any intention of taking away the guns purchased for protection, and please also don't use the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people," because if you truly believe this then we should have no regulations on how to obtain a driver's license or anything else of that nature because "cars don't kill people, people kill people."
2. Do you disagree with the notion that civilians shouldn't own "military" style firearms? And if you do, why?
1. regulations aren't stupid.
2. its not the firearm. is mass shooting prevention the goal and a few 15 round clips from a semi automatic killing 15 people or 5 people or 3 people somehow more ok?
someday we may learn...its not the gun.0 -
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »Motorsheen wrote: »TeacupsAndToning wrote: »I don't live in the United States. I live in Canada where these are the rules on owning a gun:
Canada has a ban on assault rifles and "military" style firearms like the AK 47. A firearm license is required for other guns. A safety test must be taken, and a third person character reference must be obtained.
There is a mandatory background check which includes "criminal, mental health, addiction, and domestic violence records," notes the Library of Congress. Licensing and registration is handled on the national level and must be renewed every five years.
Now, I don't think I know a single person who owns a gun, other than the rare few that own a firearm to go hunting with. That's it. So please realize that I am coming from a place where the concept of owning a gun is very foreign to me.
So, I have two questions for the Americans who don't want stricter gun laws:
1. Do you think the above regulations are stupid and if you do, why?
And please, do not use the argument of "well, if normal people don't have guns then only the criminals will" because that's just not true - from what I understand no one has any intention of taking away the guns purchased for protection, and please also don't use the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people," because if you truly believe this then we should have no regulations on how to obtain a driver's license or anything else of that nature because "cars don't kill people, people kill people."
2. Do you disagree with the notion that civilians shouldn't own "military" style firearms? And if you do, why?
In my last office, we had 12 people working there.
Of the 12, 8 carried a concealed firearm on their body at all times and I believe most of them also had a firearm (or two) in their car too.
Anyone wanting to walk thru the front door with bad intent would have had a very, very bad day.
So what are your answers to my questions?
1. Background check - no worries. I think that happens here anyway (I don't own a gun, so I don't know but I'm in Arizona and guns are everywhere)
2. My co-workers didn't carry military style weapons. They owned some, but didn't bring them into the workspace. A sidearm like a .45 or a 9mm isn't necessarily a military style weapon.
Remember, the 2nd Amendment is for protection from a tyrannical government (or to stem an invasion from Canada).1 -
Bry_Lander wrote: »SomebodyWakeUpHIcks wrote: »Chicago has strict gun laws
But Indiana doesn't, which pretty much completely renders Chicago's laws pointless. Local gun regulation will always be pointless when jurisdictions with lax laws are an hour away
In a similar way (albeit illegally) Mexico would render very strict gun control laws in the US pointless. Outlawing something that people really want creates a lucrative black market, and they would come across the southern border just like drugs.
It looks like the maniac that did this lead a very quiet, conventional. law-abiding life for 64 years, and he had the type of background suitable for owning weapons. Something changed him, and his actions in accumulating an arsenal following this change has to be uncovered. The rapid stockpiling of guns and ammo should have alerted someone in his life, whether friends, family, or gun/ammo sales outlets, unless he did this so methodically and carefully that he didn't trigger anyone's suspicion, which would be incredible.
Mexico is more analogous to Chicago in this situation. Gun laws in Mexico are SUPER strict. But cartels get a steady flow of guns across the boarder FROM the United States.
The US exports illegal guns to Mexico, and Mexico exports illegal drugs to the US.4 -
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »I don't live in the United States. I live in Canada where these are the rules on owning a gun:
Canada has a ban on assault rifles and "military" style firearms like the AK 47. A firearm license is required for other guns. A safety test must be taken, and a third person character reference must be obtained.
There is a mandatory background check which includes "criminal, mental health, addiction, and domestic violence records," notes the Library of Congress. Licensing and registration is handled on the national level and must be renewed every five years.
Now, I don't think I know a single person who owns a gun, other than the rare few that own a firearm to go hunting with. That's it. So please realize that I am coming from a place where the concept of owning a gun is very foreign to me.
So, I have two questions for the Americans who don't want stricter gun laws:
1. Do you think the above regulations are stupid and if you do, why?
And please, do not use the argument of "well, if normal people don't have guns then only the criminals will" because that's just not true - from what I understand no one has any intention of taking away the guns purchased for protection, and please also don't use the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people," because if you truly believe this then we should have no regulations on how to obtain a driver's license or anything else of that nature because "cars don't kill people, people kill people."
2. Do you disagree with the notion that civilians shouldn't own "military" style firearms? And if you do, why?
Assault weapons have been illegal in the US (with a very narrow range of exceptions) since 1986. Only 3 legally owned assault weapons have been used in murders since the 1930s. So while assault weapons look scary and seem to capture the imagination of the press and certain politicians, they are irrelevant to the gun control discussion.0 -
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »I don't live in the United States. I live in Canada where these are the rules on owning a gun:
Canada has a ban on assault rifles and "military" style firearms like the AK 47. A firearm license is required for other guns. A safety test must be taken, and a third person character reference must be obtained.
There is a mandatory background check which includes "criminal, mental health, addiction, and domestic violence records," notes the Library of Congress. Licensing and registration is handled on the national level and must be renewed every five years.
Now, I don't think I know a single person who owns a gun, other than the rare few that own a firearm to go hunting with. That's it. So please realize that I am coming from a place where the concept of owning a gun is very foreign to me.
So, I have two questions for the Americans who don't want stricter gun laws:
1. Do you think the above regulations are stupid and if you do, why?
And please, do not use the argument of "well, if normal people don't have guns then only the criminals will" because that's just not true - from what I understand no one has any intention of taking away the guns purchased for protection, and please also don't use the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people," because if you truly believe this then we should have no regulations on how to obtain a driver's license or anything else of that nature because "cars don't kill people, people kill people."
2. Do you disagree with the notion that civilians shouldn't own "military" style firearms? And if you do, why?
As a gun owner living in the U.S. these seem like common sense regulations and I would have no problem abiding by them as a responsible gun owner.
4 -
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »Bry_Lander wrote: »TeacupsAndToning wrote: »I don't live in the United States. I live in Canada where these are the rules on owning a gun:
Canada has a ban on assault rifles and "military" style firearms like the AK 47. A firearm license is required for other guns. A safety test must be taken, and a third person character reference must be obtained.
There is a mandatory background check which includes "criminal, mental health, addiction, and domestic violence records," notes the Library of Congress. Licensing and registration is handled on the national level and must be renewed every five years.
Now, I don't think I know a single person who owns a gun, other than the rare few that own a firearm to go hunting with. That's it. So please realize that I am coming from a place where the concept of owning a gun is very foreign to me.
So, I have two questions for the Americans who don't want stricter gun laws:
1. Do you think the above regulations are stupid and if you do, why?
And please, do not use the argument of "well, if normal people don't have guns then only the criminals will" because that's just not true - from what I understand no one has any intention of taking away the guns purchased for protection, and please also don't use the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people," because if you truly believe this then we should have no regulations on how to obtain a driver's license or anything else of that nature because "cars don't kill people, people kill people."
2. Do you disagree with the notion that civilians shouldn't own "military" style firearms? And if you do, why?
Assault weapons have been illegal in the US (with a very narrow range of exceptions) since 1986. Only 3 legally owned assault weapons have been used in murders since the 1930s. So while assault weapons look scary and seem to capture the imagination of the press and certain politicians, they are irrelevant to the gun control discussion.
But didn't he use a semiautomatic? Isn't that generally an assault rifle?
the gun lobby has tried relentlessly to frame "assault rifle" as only meaning fully automatic weapons. Which is a flat out lie meant to obscure the facts.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions