Real gun law changes to be done?

[mizzou]

I wonder with elections being so close...that we might see hard lines softening on getting some type of limp wristed gun legislation enacted.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/19/politics/obama-gun-control-change-in-attitude/index.html


I have a hard time though...seeing the blood of grade school children did absolutely nothing when it came to being even slightly proactive about trying to figure out who should get guns and who shouldn't.

And let's be honest...we really only care about preventing mass shooting incidents by crazy people. Criminals will always have guns. You know what criminals don't do? shoot up churches and schools. Only crazy people do that shit. Criminals at least have some damn respect to worry about.

I don't even know where to start though. I think one good step would be preventing those with extremely violent convictions and violent mental health tendencies to be barred from purchasing a firearm absent a court order.

One radical thought I will throw out there(i dont even really support though), make owners of assault style weapons enroll in a citizen-state based militia. That would maybe justify the whole 2nd amend. argument of a well trained militia and also weed out lazy gun owners who just want an AR-15 for the cool factor.

We don't just get to own and operate vehicles as a right. Why do we not treat guns the same way?

http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/

 

[shortylickens]

We had real gun law changes. They didnt reduce gun crime.

As for whackjobs: You could kill WAY more people with bleach and ammonia. Those are available for purchase all over the place. And I dont know if theres an age requirement either.

Someone with serious issues who wants to inflict pain is going to do it. Laws wont stop them. In fact Red China and the Soviet Union had super strict societies. Plenty of psychos managed to do harm.

Lets look at the cause of the problems instead of treating the symptoms.

 

[Svnla]

Someone with serious issues who wants to inflict pain is going to do it. Laws wont stop them.

Yup.

20 years ago in Japan, 13 dead, 6,000 injured/sick from a crazy guy and his followers = http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...y-sarin-attack-on-subway-system/#.VYT_VPlViko

Japan has one of the lowest violent crime rate in the world.

And look how much damage the Boston bombers were able to do with household items.

 

[mizzou]

Lets look at the cause of the problems instead of treating the symptoms.

Our politicians don't have the guts to do that either

 

[DrDoug]

No, nothing will be done. Rick Perry is already ranting about how Obama uses tragedies like this to try and take all of the guns away from our patriots, I mean law-abiding citizens. Time to get out there and load up on more stuff before Obama takes it away!

The Tree of the Second Amendment must be watered with the blood of innocents all stuff like that...

I'm a Second Amendment supporter and love my own small collection but I really don't think our Forefathers could have ever imagined the kind of world we live in today when they wrote and passed that Amendment. I feel like we are regressing into the old Wild West in parts of our country, but with a hell of a lot more firepower.

That people in a house of worship would have to consider arming themselves for protection is just nuts in this day and age.

 

[mizzou]

No, nothing will be done. Rick Perry is already ranting about how Obama uses tragedies like this to try and take all of the guns away from our patriots, I mean law-abiding citizens. Time to get out there and load up on more stuff before Obama takes it away![

The Tree of the Second Amendment must be watered with the blood of innocents all stuff like that...

I'm a Second Amendment supporter and love my own small collection but I really don't think our Forefathers could have ever imagined the kind of world we live in today when they wrote and passed that Amendment. I feel like we are regressing into the old Wild West in parts of our country, but with a hell of a lot more firepower.

That people in a house of worship would have to consider arming themselves for protection is just nuts in this day and age.

We had more expansions of gun rights under Obama then we ever did under any other president. CCW is like Plymouth rock to NRA folks. Obama is actually a sleeper cell agent of the NRA

ALso, americans have a tendency to zombie herd towards things we think are about to be rare and important.

 

[Indus]

After Sandy hook.. 75% of gun owners in America were open to gun restrictions against loony bins. But 75% of gun owners didn't get past the power of the gun lobby.

This is just more proof, and unfortunately it'll be the same, the gun lobby will obstruct.

 

[Fenixgoon]

After Sandy hook.. 75% of gun owners in America were open to gun restrictions against loony bins. But 75% of gun owners didn't get past the power of the gun lobby.

This is just more proof, and unfortunately it'll be the same, the gun lobby will obstruct.

how do you define loony bins? anyone who suffers from depression and is on some kind of medication? only those who display violent tendencies? those whose doctors think are at risk? how do you assess the risk?

there are already prohibitions on people who have been forcibly committed - that's one of the questions on the DROS/background check form that you fill out during firearm purchase.

many times mental health issues go unreported to NICS, which is the background check system. other issues include doctor/patient privilege, funding, and liability on the part of the doctor.

unfortunately, not an easy problem to solve - but i think we should be asking more than the basic question of "how do we stop this from happening again?"

as in, why do people do these things in the first place? not just how do we prevent those particular people from (legally) obtaining a firearm - but what makes people want to do this sort of thing to begin with? and as i've seen a few people comment - why is it always a male who perpetrates these sorts of acts?

 

[MongGrel]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2247648&page=476&highlight=omg+love+guns

 

[MongGrel]

No, nothing will be done. Rick Perry is already ranting about how Obama uses tragedies like this to try and take all of the guns away from our patriots, I mean law-abiding citizens. Time to get out there and load up on more stuff before Obama takes it away!

The Tree of the Second Amendment must be watered with the blood of innocents all stuff like that...

I'm a Second Amendment supporter and love my own small collection but I really don't think our Forefathers could have ever imagined the kind of world we live in today when they wrote and passed that Amendment. I feel like we are regressing into the old Wild West in parts of our country, but with a hell of a lot more firepower.

That people in a house of worship would have to consider arming themselves for protection is just nuts in this day and age.

Just stop.

Really, it's not changing at this point.

 

[master_shake_]

Just stop.

Really, it's not changing at this point.

When the president of the NRA says we should arm teachers, some might think you are too far gone.

 

[DrDoug]

Just stop.

Really, it's not changing at this point.

Stop? What the hell am I starting?! I said that nothing will be done and I meant that.

Nothing. Will. Be. Done.

 

[trenchfoot]

When the president of the NRA says we should arm teachers, some might think you are too far gone.

I remember viewing an experiment with chimpanzees, whereby the animals were conditioned to become attached to a doll for security. Then, attempts were made to take the dolls away by force. The more forceful the attempt was to take the dolls away, the more agitated, angered, fearful and resistant the chimps became.

It seems to me the NRA saw that same episode.

Just say'in.

 

[MongGrel]

When the president of the NRA says we should arm teachers, some might think you are too far gone.

Depending on where they are teaching, might not be a bad idea.

 

[OverVolt]

Yup.

20 years ago in Japan, 13 dead, 6,000 injured/sick from a crazy guy and his followers = http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...y-sarin-attack-on-subway-system/#.VYT_VPlViko

Japan has one of the lowest violent crime rate in the world.

And look how much damage the Boston bombers were able to do with household items.

Not really true. Japan has the Yakuza. They won't persecute a crime unless they are nearly 100% certain they will get a conviction. So lots of crimes go misreported as accidents, or whatever to toss them under the rug statistically.

This is why crime stats aren't really comparable between countries.

 

[sportage]

There is a problem, and it is with the guns.
Sure... a pointy pencil or bleach and ammonia could kill people too, but it doesn't.
Pointy pencils nor bleach and ammonia are not the problem in America. DUH!
Lets get real here, raising rabid bats and setting them loose in a church could also kill a bunch of people, eventually, but that doesn't happen either, realistically speaking, it just doesn't happen.
What does in fact kill masses of people in America?
Rabid bats?
Bleach and ammonia?
Pointy pencils?
Nope!
It is our guns.
What we must do first, is to stop idolizing guns.
Ban the assault weapons that have no place in society.
Even if there are collectors that have the common sense and skills to own such guns, that doesn't mean they should be allowed to.
Any more than someone should be allowed to collect Ebola, or anthrax, or atomic weapons.
Sure, no doubt there are people that could collect anthrax as a hobby and handle it safely.
Without incident, per se.
But as with assault weapons and guns able to fire 30+ rounds at a time, no citizen should be allowed to legally collect such dangerous weapons be it guns or anthrax.

Now... no one intends for the rifle or hand gun to be banned because they are useful for hunting and home protection. Which everyone agrees with.
But our obsession with guns and in particular the bad guy guns like guns used in war to kill in mass, those guns have no place in society nor to be idolized nor collected by any private citizen.

It's not the pointy pencils or the bleach with ammonia that is killing our neighbors, loved ones, and our school kids.
It "IS" our obsession with high powered guns and assault weapons.
And the NRA should be outlawed as well.
We do not need any organization in society the promotes weapons of mass destruction.
Anymore than we would tolerate the NAA (National Anthrax association).
Or the NEA (National Ebola Association).
Or the NNA (National Nukes Association).
Or the NRBA (National Rabid Bat Association).
Not to mentions, the NBAA (National Bleach and Ammonia Association).

Not until we face and address our gun obsession issues, and that means the obsession with our guns that kill in mass, will we ever see gun violence decline in America.
And one day if this trend keeps up, it "WILL" absolutely be your child, your neighbor, your loved one that dies from a nice well mannered kid that got hold of dads assault weapon.
Then, will you be sorry?
Will that change attitudes?

 

[MongGrel]

Nope.

 

[Indus]

how do you define loony bins? anyone who suffers from depression and is on some kind of medication? only those who display violent tendencies? those whose doctors think are at risk? how do you assess the risk?

there are already prohibitions on people who have been forcibly committed - that's one of the questions on the DROS/background check form that you fill out during firearm purchase.

many times mental health issues go unreported to NICS, which is the background check system. other issues include doctor/patient privilege, funding, and liability on the part of the doctor.

unfortunately, not an easy problem to solve - but i think we should be asking more than the basic question of "how do we stop this from happening again?"

as in, why do people do these things in the first place? not just how do we prevent those particular people from (legally) obtaining a firearm - but what makes people want to do this sort of thing to begin with? and as i've seen a few people comment - why is it always a male who perpetrates these sorts of acts?

Our country has an obvious problem with lonely angry young people problem who fancy viciously hateful and violent theologies.

These are the loony bins that someone notices.. our neighbors, our students, our children's friends or our friends, sometimes our spouses.. and signs are missed before they end up shooting up Sikh Temples in Wisconsin, Virginia Tech, Charleston or well fill in the blank.

It's time we as a country took responsibility and rather than blaming others, just took them to doctors to get treatment, if there is a treatment rather than giving them guns for their birthday.

 

[MongGrel]

Full Metal Jacket Rifle Range

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwjHhJdhY0I

Full Metal Jacket - Charles Whitman - Lee Harvey Oswald

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5IWK9sRYTs

Full Metal Jacket Speech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBz8ywqPyRE

Rifleman's Creed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgd2F2QNfEE

 

[boomerang]

I don't even know where to start though. I think one good step would be preventing those with extremely violent convictions and violent mental health tendencies to be barred from purchasing a firearm absent a court order.

What laws are in place now regarding this?

 

[fskimospy]

We had real gun law changes. They didnt reduce gun crime.

As for whackjobs: You could kill WAY more people with bleach and ammonia. Those are available for purchase all over the place. And I dont know if theres an age requirement either.

Someone with serious issues who wants to inflict pain is going to do it. Laws wont stop them. In fact Red China and the Soviet Union had super strict societies. Plenty of psychos managed to do harm.

Lets look at the cause of the problems instead of treating the symptoms.

Do you guys reall believe this nonsense? It's like an Onion article:

http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131

Of course we could reduce these crimes if we wanted to. You can argue that you don't think it's worth it if you want to, but let's not pretend it's some magical, unsolvable problem.

 

[boomerang]

After Sandy hook.. 75% of gun owners in America were open to gun restrictions against loony bins. But 75% of gun owners didn't get past the power of the gun lobby.

This is just more proof, and unfortunately it'll be the same, the gun lobby will obstruct.

As soon as we started labeling people as "loony bins" you'd be one of the first railing on about how they're being singled out, ostracized, disenfranchised and whatever other buzz words and phrases you can come up with. The only people you'll be OK with getting the label will be white male Republicans.

 

[Murloc]

What laws are in place now regarding this?

AFAIK it depends very much on the state.

Despite the fact that here you need a permit to own guns and you have to register all of them, this sort of stuff sometimes happen in my country too.
And this is the only country in the area that allows people to own semi-automatic rifles (no full autos or shotguns though).
So requiring a license does help, but it doesn't eliminate the problem when it comes to lone wolf attacks.

The only further step would be making weapon ownership really hard but I don't think that's the right thing to do, nor something americans would accept.
Also once a country is swamped with weapons and a black market already exists, banning weapons doesn't fix the problem because you can't possibly gather all of them, we're not talking about China or Japan, where keeping ownership of non-hunting weapons very limited is a good idea given that there aren't many weapons in circulation.

What I think would help and not cause too much of a stir is:

1. Require some paperwork. Require a license with a basic written test about common sense stuff and knowledge of law and require all guns to be registered, just like cars.
2. Implement a proper healthcare system that also accounts for mental healthcare. Then make sure that whoever releases the permits (and the military too if people want to enter) are informed about crimes, judiciary proceedings and mental issues.
3. Develop an algorhitm to identify potential dangers based on past cases. A long-running conflict with the courts is a typical indicator. If you're a potential danger, a psychological evaluation has to be requested before the license is given.

 

[Blanky]

I have a hard time though...seeing the blood of grade school children did absolutely nothing when it came to being even slightly proactive about trying to figure out who should get guns and who shouldn't.

Untrue. New York, for example, passed a divisive gun law shortly after Newtown.

I think one good step would be preventing those with extremely violent convictions and violent mental health tendencies to be barred from purchasing a firearm absent a court order.

I agree, though I don't really know how to implement it because there are many problems to be dealt with in its application.

My thoughts are not much will change and that quite indubitably the 2nd amendment is already being broken because gun laws are already widely too strict and definitely infringe access to arms. To do it right, if people want to curtail guns more, the 2nd needs to be repealed. There is not good support for this, and in recent years a lot of people are actually--according to polls--are changing their views on access to guns toward the concealed-carry support, for example; what I'm saying is getting 2/3rd of both houses to agree to repeal is a total non-starter right now.

 

[Blanky]

Of course we could reduce these crimes if we wanted to. You can argue that you don't think it's worth it if you want to, but let's not pretend it's some magical, unsolvable problem.

It certainly can be done, but comes with costs to certain other freedoms/rights, but yes it is definitely a problem with some solutions. An all out ban on civilian firearm ownership would, despite the screams of certain people, reduce gun crime if it were severe enough. But like I said, there are costs: no sporting use of firearms, no hunting, no armed self defense (which is often legitimate, and not always against other people who have guns, either).

You know as well as I do that this topic always ends up with people digging in their heels because like all topics in the public consciousness there is no gray area, no area for compromise. So we get some gun owners who say they want no laws or virtually none and some gun grabbers who refuse to allow access at all, but no compromises.

I bet a lot of gun owners and gun grabbers could agree, for example, to make all states shall-issue for access to concealed carry (gun owners would love this), but at the same time a much better way to keep guns away from nutters (gun grabbers would love that). Won't happen, so this stuff is instead fought tooth and nail in court in each state.

Some people want to take guns away from everyone because we can't seem to figure out how to keep them away from only the small people who are crazy. One solution seems easy: take all guns, because the real problem is seemingly harder to solve.