Evil Avatar  



Go Back   Evil Avatar > Geek Love > Totally Off Topic

» Sponsored Links


» Recent Threads
NEOGEO mini Review...
Last post by Metal Jesus
Today 07:56 AM
4 Replies, 520 Views
Fantastic Beasts: The...
Last post by Evil Avatar
Today 07:38 AM
11 Replies, 693 Views
Jack Black Still has Box...
Last post by Chief Smash
Yesterday 06:18 PM
15 Replies, 1,129 Views
Liberals gone wild
Last post by VenomUSMC
Yesterday 05:03 PM
2,439 Replies, 299,637 Views
Report: Netflix in Talks...
Last post by SpectralThundr
Yesterday 11:04 AM
12 Replies, 1,253 Views
Destiny 2 Gambit's Free...
Last post by Booda
Yesterday 09:44 AM
5 Replies, 778 Views
Hostile Trailer...
Last post by Evil Avatar
Yesterday 07:53 AM
4 Replies, 748 Views
Call of Duty: Black Ops...
Last post by Scherge
Yesterday 02:29 AM
3 Replies, 834 Views
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-25-2018, 05:02 PM   #1
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 7,095
Gun Control

Is there any such thing as “Common Sense Gun Reform” that will actually work?

I would like to hear someone be able to suggest something factual beyond the regular bull crap like close “the gunshow loophole”, which doesn’t exist, or “universal background checks” which seem to be toothless.

Here are my primary arguments.

1) The biggest of them:

The 2nd Amendment requires the civilian population to have the capability to provide an armed resistance to the State. This means the civilian population must have access to weaponry of a similar standard to what the State outfits their Agents. The whole “it was written when everyone had muskets” trope is a red herring. The musket was the peak of weapons technology at the time and they expected almost every man of age to own one.

Banning or preventing civilians from acquiring weapons of those types is, IMO, antithetical to the spirit and letter of the 2nd Amendment.

However, this has been allowed to occur over the course of the 20th century to the point where the Agents of the State can now clearly outgun any civilian. But firepower isn’t the only variable in the equation of an armed resistance or the original American Revolution would have ended differently, as would many other revolutions in history.

Even conflicts which seem to come down to simple arms such as we’ve been seeing in the case of the Middle East show indigenous peoples holding their own against the full might of the US war machine with turnkey hardware. Plus, keep in mind the U.S. Military is not allowed to be deployed to perform combat ops on U.S. soil.

2) Regulation should be at the meta level, not the nickel and dime level e.g. “bullet control”

3) The primary legitimate purpose of a handgun in civilian ownership is self defense; i.e. provide the option to severely hurt or kill someone. I stipulate MOST handguns are not used or owned for hunting or sport.

4) There are legitimate uses for long-rifles and shotguns in many people’s lives outside of self defense.

5) Age restrictions on PURCHASE, such as Rick Scott announced, are meaningless gestures.

6) There have been few, if any, non-partisan studies used to guide real and rational gun policy. The few non-partisan scholars available seem to be ignored as the data is inconvenient to the narrative (see John Lott’s excellent studies about firearms, crime rates and multi degree analyses covering geography, time lapse, community, and many other factors).

7) When laws are found not to work, they should be removed. The cumulative effect doesn’t seem to be making a difference (i.e. maximum magazine capacity limits hasn’t seem to made any appreciable difference in death toll and so on).

Personally, I am fine with having mandatory training and certification and frequent recertification checkpoints twice yearly or more often. I was shocked to hear many LEOs don’t have to recertify more often.

I am NOT fine with putting an age limit on purchase above 18. If you can vote and register and be drafted you should be able to buy a gun, smoke, drink, and be a real-life adult. Or change selective service and the voting age to match.

I am fine with actually enforcing the laws we have on the books. More than fine. Why people are running around with guns as felons or not being registered to the various systems like the Texas Church Shooter is beyond me.

I am NOT fine with a registry of owned weapons. The ability to disarm the populace at a whim is contrary to the ability to resist the State as per the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.

I am NOT fine with requiring our Teachers to be armed. Personally I’d rather not have any teacher armed but if they choose to be then OK. But I’ve seen too many instances of schools where the kids run the classrooms and threaten or even beat up the teacher to want to think of what could happen if a teacher had a gun there.

I am fine with removing the concept of gun free zones.

I am fine with investing in technology, be it fingerprint or DNA matching, or whatever to make “smart guns”. I think this is an area I may look into myself now.

In closing I have one thought which I thought might be helpful even though it may smack of regulation and restriction. And it is particular to handguns which I honestly can find no use for outside of killing people. Which is fine, self defense is a perfectly legitimate role for a weapon.

Handguns are the greatest taker of lives. Forget Florida, forget Vegas. They are flashy but the numbers speak for themselves.

When I was looking to buy a gun and a shotgun the two items I was also going to buy were a fingerprint shotgun rack and a fingerprint carrier. The handgun goes in the gun safe and slides under the bed or under the seat in the car. If I need it I grab it and open it.

The concern about dirt and mud and sweat and blood which condemns biometric solutions doesn’t seem to be a concern when securing your weapons in controlled circumstances where many people will argue they want the weapon the most (concealed carry not withstanding).

So I would not be opposed to requiring every handgun come packaged with a biometric case which has the “parent” fingerprint programmed at the dealer. Any firearm transfer of that weapon would be paired with that safe (or an exception would have to be made and explained and a new safe procured) which would happen in the presence of the Federally licensed Firearms dealer where the new biometric “parent” signature would be assigned and all “child” fingerprints deleted.

Until biometrics was more reliable in uncertain weather and ground conditions I wouldn’t see it being used on actual weapons but to secure a weapon in the home or a vehicle to guard against access? It seems pretty reasonable to me.

It might not make a dent now but over time the number of firearm deaths from stolen guns could see a big drop. Also it gives the chance to have a record of access.

And yes, I am perfectly aware of how... imperfect the technology is at the moment. But if Apple can make it so your phone recognizes your face 99.99999% of the time, enough so BANKS trust it with all your financial data and people still complain this is a worse rate than their fingerprint tech I’d say we are at a good starting point.
vallor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 05:24 PM   #2
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 7,095
As an aside: you could add a biometrics to a weapon with a token that “expires” after a certain interval. For example you have your carry weapon set to a 36 hour interval so when you dress in the morning and put it on activate.

The weapon is now active as normal for 36 hours however after that time the weapon becomes inoperable until activated again by a valid fingerprint.

This could help address the “what happens if it can’t read my fingerprint properly right when my life is on the line” concern.

Then the lost, stolen, or otherwise misappropraited weapon is nothing more than a dud.

And yes, of course technology is defeatable. We aren’t going to be able to solve gun crime. Even all the places where people can’t have guns haven’t solved gun crime. The goal is to raise the barrier to entry with minimal impact to law abiding citizens and I think this helps do it.

Oh, I should also note another thing I won’t accept as a solution:

I am NOT fine with increasing licensing fees or increasing taxes on firearms of any kind or related accessories, selling, stores, or whatever. Owning a gun isn’t a cool thing only rich people should be able to do.
vallor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 05:53 PM   #3
Mad Max RW
Evil Dead
 
Mad Max RW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 839
If a psychopath or gangster out on the streets wants to kill a bunch of people no amount of gun control laws will stop them. This is proven time and time again. Put the psychos back inside a controlled hospital for the rest of their lives and the gangsters back in prison where they broadcast on live tv no holds barred thunderdome style deathmatches for us good patriotic Americans to watch at home. Wall off lost cities like Chicago and Bridgeport. That's like half the country's murder rate erased from the statistics right there.
Mad Max RW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 06:21 PM   #4
JazGalaxy
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,569
I donít necessarily believe in limiting access to guns. When you look at the statistics of who owns guns and how many gun deaths there are, itís obvious that the causality Of gun related deaths isnít the guns.

But gun related deaths are OBVIOUSLY a problem in our society. Specifically in mass shooter scenarios.

I absolutely do have a problem with people who arenít willing to talk solutions to that problem, and that includes the NRA. The failure of the NRA to talk sensibly about any of this is what has caused the rhetoric to become so polarized and extremist.

Weíre a few years away from being able to buy a cheap drone from amazon, 3D print a mechhanism to attach a sniper rifle to it, kill anyone from anywhere and just fly away. I donít think the forefathers were protecting any bodies right to instant, untraceable murder. And if they WERE (which they werenít), maybe they werenít so smart. Ancestor worship doesnít benefit anyone in a rational society.

The problem isnít even ďmental healthĒ, which is a cop out to try to turn the perpetrators of violence into ďotheredĒ monsters so we can feel like their actions arenít anyoneís responsibility but their own. The real problem is a thousands of tiny cracks in our social and moral interactions that have led young men to become so frustrated and angry.
JazGalaxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 07:13 PM   #5
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 7,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazGalaxy View Post
I don’t necessarily believe in limiting access to guns. When you look at the statistics of who owns guns and how many gun deaths there are, it’s obvious that the causality Of gun related deaths isn’t the guns.

But gun related deaths are OBVIOUSLY a problem in our society. Specifically in mass shooter scenarios.
No, you are wrong. They get the buzz but the vast majority of deliberate violence fatalities are not mass shooter scenarios as defined by the justice system (4 or more injured).

Quote:
I absolutely do have a problem with people who aren’t willing to talk solutions to that problem, and that includes the NRA. The failure of the NRA to talk sensibly about any of this is what has caused the rhetoric to become so polarized and extremist.
You and millions of others misunderstand the mission of the NRA. It isn’t to solve issues of gun crime. The NRA is to defending against the erosion of the 2nd Amendment.

The fact they haven’t come up with a good response other than to arm others in response, particularly in light of the fact the many recent situations wouldn’t have turned out differently, is a failure of their ability to articulate their mission in light of people (like you) seeking a scapegoat.

It’s the same as the left when they propose equally stupid solutions like the litany of “common sense gun reform” (most of what is being suggested is already around in many places and still does nothing).

Quote:
The real problem is a thousands of tiny cracks in our social and moral interactions that have led young men to become so frustrated and angry.
Be that as it may the result of the cracks is, among other things, the mental issues. Since we can’t seem to address it, and frankly men’s health mental or otherwise is clearly not a national or global priority, it will have to be addressed in another way.

Also, you can already 3D print most of an AR right now which would be untraceable and anyone with a little bit of metalshop and crafting know how can make a firearm if they look it up on the internet.

We can always throw up reasons why not to progress or try if we want. But most people in society WANT to progress and try but not at every expense possible.

This is why the left and the right can’t seem to see eye to eye on this issue.
vallor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 07:18 PM   #6
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 7,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max RW View Post
If a psychopath or gangster out on the streets wants to kill a bunch of people no amount of gun control laws will stop them. This is proven time and time again.
I donít think anyone argues this.

Quote:
Wall off lost cities like Chicago and Bridgeport.
You watched a lot of 80s movies this weekend before you posted, didnít you?
vallor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 08:05 PM   #7
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazGalaxy View Post
The failure of the NRA
The NRA has absolutely nothing to do with what happened in FL. Failure on the part of law enforcement and the school system is what allowed this unnecessary tragedy to occur.

Failure, failure, failure.

* Dozens of interactions between police and Cruz. No arrest or follow up.
* BULLETS brought to school in his book bag. No arrest or follow up.
* Pointing a gun at people in the past, threatening to shoot people, reported with no arrest or follow up.
* A school where teachers knew to watch out for him with a book bag, but no arrest or follow up.
* Police who stayed OUTSIDE while the shooting was occurring. Cowards.
* Calls and reports to the FBI that he was a ticking timebomb waiting to kill people. No arrest or follow up.

There is NOTHING in this situation that requires allowing YOU to take away MY Second Amendment rights. "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

It's been infringed enough, thank you. FUCK OFF.

Where do these criminal mass shootings occur? Schools, churches, places where a shooter is safe and others are not. Mass shootings in schools NEVER happen in Israel. Gee, I guess it's because Palestinians love Israeli children and have agreed not to target them in schools, right? Not because Israel has armed their schools with law enforcement and teachers...no siree!
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D

Last edited by Terran; 02-25-2018 at 08:20 PM..
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 10:19 PM   #8
JazGalaxy
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by vallor View Post
No, you are wrong. They get the buzz but the vast majority of deliberate violence fatalities are not mass shooter scenarios as defined by the justice system (4 or more injured).



You and millions of others misunderstand the mission of the NRA. It isnít to solve issues of gun crime. The NRA is to defending against the erosion of the 2nd Amendment.

The fact they havenít come up with a good response other than to arm others in response, particularly in light of the fact the many recent situations wouldnít have turned out differently, is a failure of their ability to articulate their mission in light of people (like you) seeking a scapegoat.

Itís the same as the left when they propose equally stupid solutions like the litany of ďcommon sense gun reformĒ (most of what is being suggested is already around in many places and still does nothing).



Be that as it may the result of the cracks is, among other things, the mental issues. Since we canít seem to address it, and frankly menís health mental or otherwise is clearly not a national or global priority, it will have to be addressed in another way.

Also, you can already 3D print most of an AR right now which would be untraceable and anyone with a little bit of metalshop and crafting know how can make a firearm if they look it up on the internet.

We can always throw up reasons why not to progress or try if we want. But most people in society WANT to progress and try but not at every expense possible.

This is why the left and the right canít seem to see eye to eye on this issue.
Iím typing this on iPad and cannot format this as well as I would like.

In response to your saying that the ďmajorityĒ of shootings are not mass shootings and therefore I am wrong is bizarre. Iím not saying the majority of shootings are mass shootings and that is what makes them a problem. I am saying that mass shootings happen AT ALL is what makes them an obvious problem in our society. 20 years ago, a single mass shooting was considered a travesty. Now itís not out of the ordinary to have multiple in the same month. If terrorism is the concept of making people afraid to live their lives as they normally would, suspended in a state of terror, then many modern Americans feel that way.


You say that I misunderstand the point of the NRA, which is not to solve gun violence, it to protect the second amendment. These are not mutually exclusive concepts. In many cases, the NRA directly impedes solving gun violence by, in their mind, protecting the second amendment.

https://www.gq.com/story/inside-fede...-too-many-guns

This is a fantastic article about how the NRA has successfully lobbied to keep the government from having an electronic database of gun owners in the United States. So if a gun is used in a crime, rather than type the number into a computer and have it spit out gun records, potentially solving a crime in minutes, we taxpayers pay actual people to rummage through warehouses of paper records for no other reason than ďprotecting the erosion of the second amendmentĒ through the eyes of a certain group of people.

Thatís the kind of thing that makes no sense to me.

I live in Texas. There is a big sign off the freeway closest to my house that literally says GUNS GUNS GUNS. Iíve shot guns. Iím not agraid of guns or fail to understand guns.

But much like the reason corporations are inherently evil, so is any special interest group that exists purely to further a particular agenda. When a PERSON is confronted with new information or a change in circumstances, a PERSON can change their mind or alter their course. But an artificial entity that exists solely to perpetuate its own existence can never change its mind or change course. To do so would be to violate its entire reason for being.

Itís like law. A prosecuting lawyer is never going to say, ďoh, you know what? Iím wrong. You ARE innocent. And to think I almost sent you to jail for a crime you didnít commit! Wow is my face red.Ē

The NRA is never going to be a voice of reason where guns are concerned, and thatís a problem given how much power they wield.
JazGalaxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2018, 10:39 PM   #9
JazGalaxy
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,569


This is the GUNS sign. In the distance, you can almost make out GUNS AND GOLD, which is about a half a mile down the road. If you turn around, you’d see GUNS GUNS GUNS. This is just three gun stores on a mile stretch of road. On the opposite side of the freeway there are several more.

If you like guns, you should really be in Texas. And honestly you should probably just be in Texas anyways.
JazGalaxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 04:14 AM   #10
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazGalaxy View Post
But much like the reason corporations are inherently evil, so is any special interest group that exists purely to further a particular agenda.
I'm sure you feel that way about Planned Parenthood as well.

The STUPID is STRONG with you. The shooting in Florida has nothing to do with the NRA and everything to do with law enforcement failing to enforce laws currently on the books.

Period. NEXT.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 04:33 AM   #11
JazGalaxy
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terran View Post
I'm sure you feel that way about Planned Parenthood as well.

The STUPID is STRONG with you. The shooting in Florida has nothing to do with the NRA and everything to do with law enforcement failing to enforce laws currently on the books.

Period. NEXT.
I DO feel that way about Planned Parenthood.

Oh look, Terran is arguing with the charicatures he invents instead of real people again! It must be Monday.
JazGalaxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 05:32 AM   #12
Chimpbot
Godzillaologist
 
Chimpbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Third Planet of the Black Hole
Posts: 8,333
I really wish people would stop bringing up the "well-regulated" militia as an argument against the Second Amendment; it's separate from the right of the people to keep and bear arms.



While I think we can all agree that something needs to be done, banning guns simply isn't going to happen. First and foremost, we'd need to see 30+ states agree to ratify the constitution and supersede the Second Amendment. Even if this did happen, we would then need to go about the process of actually collecting the firearms in a country where there are famously more guns than people.

It's a complicated, multifaceted issue and there simply isn't a one-size-fits-all solution that will actually work.

At the end of the day, I guess I'm one of those nutbags who doesn't want to give up their firearms.
__________________
EvAv's Senior Godzillaologist
Member of the Nintendo Offensive Front
Chimpbot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 05:53 AM   #13
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazGalaxy View Post
I DO feel that way about Planned Parenthood.
Excellent! Since they're not exercising a constitutionally protected right (to take tax money from me to pay for others' abortions...that's not in the constitution!) you get busy cutting off their taxpayer funding and/or shutting them down completely.

When you're done cutting off their taxpayer funding, come on back and let's talk about how you want to infringe on my clearly delineated constitutional right to bear arms.

Until then, fuck off.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 07:06 AM   #14
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 7,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazGalaxy View Post
I’m typing this on iPad and cannot format this as well as I would like.
I use a logi type cover with mine and it works great, like a regular laptop. With backlit keys and everything. Great investment for a modern iPad since the keyboard also powers from the iPad. Otherwise Zagg makes some great keyboard cases for iPads.

Quote:
In response to your saying that the “majority” of shootings are not mass shootings and therefore I am wrong is bizarre. I’m not saying the majority of shootings are mass shootings and that is what makes them a problem.
The implication was you were most concerned with “specifically” mass shootings. Which is curious because they are by far the minority of gun deaths. If not then it’s just a miscommunication.

Quote:
I am saying that mass shootings happen AT ALL is what makes them an obvious problem in our society.
Mass *death* will never be eliminated. But yes, the frequency of mass shootings is troubling. While (political) terrorism related attacks account for much of the increase it’s clear it is not the full story.

Quote:
You say that I misunderstand the point of the NRA, which is not to solve gun violence, it to protect the second amendment. These are not mutually exclusive concepts. In many cases, the NRA directly impedes solving gun violence by, in their mind, protecting the second amendment.
The article shows how the lack of imagination on the side of the government makes their job harder. A searchable database of gun<->owners would absolutely be a disaster as it would make it trivial for the State to confiscate weapons at will.

It is not the job of the citizens or the NRA to figure out how to best solve gun crime without infringing on the 2nd Amendment or compromise because it makes the cops job tougher. Many amendments, like the 1st, 4th, and 5th, and 8th make the job of law enforcement more difficult. Which of those should we also neuter to make crime solving more convienent?

The mandate of the NRA is to stop the erosion of the 2nd Amendment and try to regain ground lost since the beginning of the 20th century. That doesn’t mean there aren’t solutions out there that can increase safety and confidence without infringement but it is NOT the mandate of the NRA to come up with them. The NRA, based on its membership, simply decides if the proposed solutions are good or bad for the 2nd Amendment and lobbies appropriately.

But since politicians are dumb the NRA leadership has had to try and come up with solutions, and they aren’t great at it. “Good guy with a gun” indeed.

As for imagination, did anyone ever suggest building a database of just the serial numbers while keeping the names as unsearchable parts of the records? It would perform the same level of abstraction but allow quick cross referencing for investigators. But since it’s not an “all or nothing” solution I’m sure it’s no good for anyone one.

Quote:
The NRA is never going to be a voice of reason where guns are concerned, and that’s a problem given how much power they wield.
The NRA is very much the voice of reason when it comes to guns AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME. Bad things happen when the wrong people get their hands on weapons and they know that but they also are fighting back as fools try to clamp down and even destroy the 2nd Amendment.

FWIW I do think there should be some governance on firearms so if left unfettered and allowed to reach their ultimate goal of fully unrestricted weapon ownership on parity with the state the NRA will have reached dangerous levels.

IMO the NRA is more important for Americans right now than any other civil rights organization. They are the only ones speaking against the grain and holding onto the unpopular position. They are the ones who will keep us from sliding into a cesspit of further confusing rules and regulations which muddy the waters state to state and even county to county.

That said I agree with you if they are going to defend the 2nd they should stick try to do a better job. Sometimes they can be a little off-putting, particular Wayne LaPierre. The only real solutions they offer of simply flooding our schools and other public spaces with more guns isn’t the right answer any more than doubling down on failed background checks, limited magazine sizes, and more bullshit of that ilk.

The “good guy with a gun” doesn’t solve the problem it treats a symptom. 10,000 school cops and such since Columbine and we still have way too many kids dying.

The wrong people are getting weapons. This includes people who shouldn’t have passed background checks, who are poorly trained, mentally unstable, have the weapon illegally, or may be plain and pure evil.

We need to be able to stop them from getting those weapons or, if we can’t stop them from getting them make it more difficult to exercise the use of them.

I’ve expanded my suggestions:
1) Actually fully enforce the laws we have on the books instead of making new laws, and not just for firearms but for crime in general but with a focus on people who are found committing crimes with firearms illegally. Yes, it means more people will go to prison. I am not suggesting minimum sentencing guidelines btw. I am suggesting a career criminal with multiple felonies caught AGAIN with a gun not be released back onto the streets.

2) Invest in biometric technology to help prevent the wrong people from obtaining a weapon or, should they obtain a weapon, using it. Of course there is no way to completely eliminate the possibility however this could have saved someone like Katie Steinle or deaths from stolen guns or guns found in homes that have been idle for some time and not activated by the owner.

3) Modernize the way serial numbers for weapons are tracked; don’t allow text input fields for names but allow it for seriel numbers (per the article). This will aid investigators without compromising purchaser identity any further

4) We need a standard set of laws; right now you need to be a lawyer to track everything that is different just driving between one state and the next.

Like the guy who nearly went to jail after he traveled from North Carolina to help with Hurricane Sandy relief but didn’t realize in New Jersey you have to store your gun locked in your trunk, not in the cab.

Or the guy spent 10 days in jail because he didn’t have a NJ license for a gun he had in his checked bag the airline unloaded for him in Newark.

Don’t get me started on California. Consider yourself lucky you are in Texas where you get to complain, but ignore, the blazing freedom of the 2nd Amendment right in front of your face.

5) I need to learn more about the NICS. I hear a lot “the guy passed the background check what more do you expect?” I wonder if there is room for improvement there or if that is just left wing hooey. It could be that the background checking system is just a big piece of shit but from what I’ve heard it is actually pretty good at catching the majority of shitbags who try to fool it.

EDIT: added 5th suggestion

Last edited by vallor; 02-26-2018 at 07:24 AM..
vallor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 07:27 AM   #15
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by vallor
The only real solutions they offer of simply flooding our schools and other public spaces with more guns isn’t the right answer
Refuted in the real world in Israel. Proof that legal mass ownership of guns deters mass attacks. On numerous occasions everyday Israelis have stopped rampaging Palestinians attempting to kill people.

Mass shootings occur almost exclusively in gun free zones. Laws don't protect people from criminals (plenty of laws made what Cruz did illegal, and the authorities just didn't bother enforcing them), nor do armed officers outside the zone of attack (the coward of Broward would most likely have returned fire if he'd been in the building when the shooting began, out of pure self-defensive interest). What protects people is those being targeted having the right AND ability to defend themselves.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 09:58 AM   #16
Whimbrel
Subhuman
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by vallor View Post
Is there any such thing as “Common Sense Gun Reform” that will actually work?

1) The biggest of them:
The 2nd Amendment...

2) Regulation should be at the meta level, not the nickel and dime level e.g. “bullet control”

3) The primary legitimate purpose of a handgun in civilian ownership is self defense; i.e. provide the option to severely hurt or kill someone. I stipulate MOST handguns are not used or owned for hunting or sport.

4) There are legitimate uses for long-rifles and shotguns in many people’s lives outside of self defense.

5) Age restrictions on PURCHASE, such as Rick Scott announced, are meaningless gestures.

6) There have been few, if any, non-partisan studies used to guide real and rational gun policy. ....

7) When laws are found not to work, they should be removed. The cumulative effect doesn’t seem to be making a difference...

I am NOT fine with a registry of owned weapons. The ability to disarm the populace at a whim...
First off, thanks for starting this thread. I had similar ideas, but my recent attempts have caused a lot of heartburn for a few people who can't sleep unless they triple check if my posts are genuine.

I also appreciate that you are treating this as a complicated issue. I agree.

I'm probably pretty far on the opposite side of you ideologically on gun control, but I will admit that I do not have any creative ideas that seem like they will automatically fix the problem. I'll say that again. I definitely do not have the answer. Ideologically, it seems like we have almost reached a point where acknowledging that there is a problem that needs addressing is some kind of partisan surrender in and of itself, similar to how we see a White House completely sanguine in response to Russian election meddling. There has been a long standing gymnastic contortion in how we discuss gun violence in which there are over a hundred thousand deaths and injuries by guns each year but we see some trying to argue that guns have nothing to do with that.

Having said that, I think the overwhelming majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens who would never dream of hurting anyone with their guns, aside from self defense. So, taking guns away from these people arbitrarily would seem to make as much sense as somebody taking away my toaster.

Nevertheless, I do think there are things that can and should be done that could make a difference while not unduly burdening gun owners.

First, I will address your specific points.

1. It is a fact that people disagree about the 2nd amendment. People disagree about its intent, grammatical implications, modern relevance, etc. Some want to take it literally, others want to infer, others want to modify it for an interpretation that is more relevant to a 21st century context. I think it is absolute stupidity for anybody to pretend that there is only one way to read or interpret the 2nd amendment. However, regardless of where one comes down on what the 2nd amendment means, was intended to mean, what the supreme court has allowed up to now, etc, there are other things involved here. I think we can all agree that the framers did not anticipate that the 2nd amendment would be used to defend a situation that allows over 100,000 actual deaths and injuries every year (not to mention other criminal results) to be balanced against an increasingly ridiculous pie in the sky imaginary tyrannical government defense. I would also argue that nowhere in the 2nd amendment is the idea that people should have a right to own and bear arms for "The primary legitimate purpose of a handgun in civilian ownership is self defense." At least, in the sense that most people think of self defense. Right or wrong, the constitution was not intended as a death pact, or to create domestic terrorism and insecurity in our free state., so, just as you mentioned, if a law is not having its desired effect, we should get rid of it.

2. Why? I'm not saying you are wrong or that I disagree, but I don't know what is wrong with this from your perspective.

3. Handguns. I'm not sure where to put this comment, but I guess it is as relevant to handguns as anything else in this discussion. When the space shuttle blew apart, they investigated every single contributing factor and addressed every single one, from management attitudes, inspection protocols, materials used in parts, etc. What they didn't do was say, "Well the O-ring cracked, but that had nothing to do with it, people made the decision to use that o-ring and launch under cold conditions and install the o-ring, so people are the problems only. The o-rings are fine." Obviously, that is a flawed analogy, but I am just trying to give an example of the type of thinking and conversations that have gone on in this issue. If an ikea crib is tippy and kills a few kids, they recall it. If a bucky ball magnet is ingested by a toddler they take it off the market. We don't pretend that accidental deaths are acceptable with any other product, nor do we say that the products themselves had nothing to do with it. So, I think we need to include every aspect of the problem in any discussion of an actual solution in a very direct and honest way. I am not sure why you mentioned that a gun show loophole doesn't exist, but many states have completely unregulated 2nd hand distribution of guns. You can get guns without any background checks or anything buy or trade as easily as an old xbox console from the local classified ads. Whatever you call it, that seems like a bad idea.

4.) I don't know about any legitimate uses for AR-15s, but hunting rifles and shotguns used by hunters, I completely agree. I would support an assault weapons ban immediately.

5) Again, why exactly?

6) I support immediately funding as much gun violence research as necessary and getting rid of the amendment that states research can not be used to advocate gun control.

7) Some policy changes take a generation or so to make a difference. Also, as soon as you set up a system like this, there will always be somebody who comes along and says that the system isn't working and the law should be abandoned. Or you might have a gun company pay people to claim that the law isn't working or fund their own research to prove that. Essentially, cf climate change.

Unlike you, I think a registry would be a good idea, but I also don't think the government is likely to start confiscating guns on a whim.

Now, just as I can't snap my fingers and deport 12 million undocumented Americans, I also can't snap my fingers and make 400 million guns disappear. (that number was a guess, I don't actually know what the total estimate is right now) However, if I knew with absolute certainty that it would end all gun crime and innocent deaths, I would be willing to accept that as a reasonable accommodation from our collective citizenry. Yes, I would be asking innocent people to give up a treasured object in favor of saving innocent lives, but it seems like a very small price to pay or ask for in order to preserve security of a free state.

However, I don't think that is realistic right now.

I noticed that your OP did not really say anything about mental health, and while I don't think that is the only part of the problem, I do agree that it is a contributing factor in many of these mass shootings and in many of the other situations with gun violence.

Briefly to Chimpbot. I watched the Penn and Teller video you shared. I disagree with Penn on this, although he states his opinions forcefully. Have we ever seen him be demure?

Here is a more exhaustive discussion of the 2nd amendment-

http://www.radiolab.org/story/radiol...fect-gun-show/

Last edited by Whimbrel; 02-26-2018 at 03:14 PM..
Whimbrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 10:08 AM   #17
Mad Max RW
Evil Dead
 
Mad Max RW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 839
Quote:
Originally Posted by vallor View Post
I donít think anyone argues this.



You watched a lot of 80s movies this weekend before you posted, didnít you?
Heh, nope. I watched that forgettable It remake. But I am 15 minutes away from downtown Bridgeport. If I wanted to be scared for my life I'd get on I 95 (also terrifying) and head toward NYC.
Mad Max RW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 10:13 AM   #18
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Terran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
It is a fact that people disagree about the 2nd amendment.
I have good news for you! The Heller decision has cleared up any and all confusion about an individual right to bear arms, just like the Obergefell decision cleared up gay marriage.

Don't like either one? TOUGH. It's done. Settled case law.

Quote:
You can get guns without any background checks or anything buy or trade as easily as an old xbox console from the local classified ads.
And that is just a lie.

Quote:
I don't know about any legitimate uses for AR-15s
You don't need to. It's a delineated constitutional right that "shall not be infringed." Quite simple.

Quote:
...getting rid of the amendment that states research can not be used to advocate gun control.
Using science as an ideological tool has worked so well for the left on global warmi...ahem, repackaged and rebranded as climate change..hasn't it? lol.

Quote:
I also can't snap my fingers and make 400 million guns disappear. (that number was a guess, I don't actually know what the total estimate is right now) However, if I knew with absolute certainty that it would end all gun crime and innocent deaths, I would be willing to accept that as a reasonable accommodation from our collective citizenry.
So if you know that gay sex can lead to AIDS, will you ban that as a reasonable accommodation from our collective citizenry? You know...public health and all that.

You don't get to waive away people's constitutional rights because they are inconvenient for you. Tough shit.

#DealWithIt. The 2A is not up to you.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D

Last edited by Terran; 02-26-2018 at 10:28 AM..
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 11:28 AM   #19
Emabulator
The Voight-Kampff
 
Emabulator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Garden State
Posts: 31,136
Blog Entries: 58


Emabulator is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2018, 12:16 PM   #20
Whimbrel
Subhuman
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,847
I guess it makes sense when a Reality show jackass is president that people think a talk show host and an actor would be good constitutional scholars and policy analysts.

Last edited by Whimbrel; 02-26-2018 at 03:10 PM..
Whimbrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:16 AM.