who should we not allow to buy guns

[bruceb]

In addition to banning certain people, there should also be a mandatory set of courses and tests you have to pass and it should require a license. Basically it should be like driving a car. The tests could cover not only gun safety but other factors like dealing with a hostile situation responsibly.

In the USA the Federal NICS check system does most of that already. Sorry to to say, some gun dealers in lax states, do not follow the law, but most of them do. And in almost all of the states, where you can get a Concealed Carry Permit, you do need to take a course and pass gun safety and handling before you get a carry permit. They also fingerprint you (some also take your picture as well)

 

[edro]

You can't solve it; it is impossible.

 

[luv2liv]

But what about that guy that shot and killed America's sniper?

You could argue that he jumped through all those hoops and was more prepared to own a gun then any of us.

yep. just because someone is sane today, doesnt mean they wont go postal tomorrow. but it's just so much easier to blame muslims, mental, or violent games and cartoons.

 

[desura]

yep. just because someone is sane today, doesnt mean they wont go postal tomorrow. but it's just so much easier to blame muslims, mental, or violent games and cartoons.

The hardest to blame are guns and Muslims because they have the most crazy extremist defenders.

 

[Charmonium]

yep. just because someone is sane today, doesnt mean they wont go postal tomorrow. but it's just so much easier to blame muslims, mental, or violent games and cartoons.

If you had mandatory psych testing for gun ownership, it would turn up issues long before they became manifest. Mental illness isn't like a witch's curse. You don't wake up one day and suddenly you're insane.

 

[desura]

Oh, and the WAPO reports that this guy was increasingly religious as of late, and attended an Islamic center a few days ago.

So yeah, Islam is probably the biggest factor.

 

[olds]

Even if the 2nd Amendment was ripped right out of the Constitution, there are like how many guns per person in the U.S? 2?

Like the illegal drug trade, criminals won't abide by some bureaucrats dumb ass ideas.

But I digress. This dude was investigated since 2003 and a proper gun background check should red flag these people. It will never happen due to the second amendment. partisan politics and political correctness.

FTFE

 

[NutBucket]

Actually the 5th and 14th Amendments are more relevant as to why this person was allowed to purchase weapons.

How would you feel if you were accused of a crime you didn't commit and as a result was unable to board a plane or drive a car?

EDIT: Forgot to mention that 2 & 3 in the OP's list are already prohibited from legally buying weapons.

Re: number 2.

Who makes the determination and what are the criteria?

Mental health professionals, at their discretion, can notify authorities and as a result legally owned guns will be confiscated and said individuals will be unable to legally purchase guns (NICS will flag them).

 

[Charmonium]

Mental health professionals, at their discretion, can notify authorities and as a result legally owned guns will be confiscated and said individuals will be unable to legally purchase guns (NICS will flag them).

I'm sure you realize that most of these people have never seen a professional and are unlikely to. And even when they do, that person has to be competent, which honestly, is something of a crap shoot. That's why you need to test people up front.

As far as the only the bad guys will have guns trope. That's typical NRA bullshit. The NRA wants you to believe that any sort of regulation is a first step down the road to banning guns. I'm sure there are some people on the left and even middle of the road who might favor that, but the fact of the matter is that by being completely intransigent, you make that result even more likely.

There IS going to be federal regulation. Accept that as a fact. Now decide if you want to be part of the conversation or standing outside with your picket sign.

 

[dainthomas]

You can't solve it; it is impossible.

I gotta dig up that Onion article.

 

[Paladin3]

Honestly, anyone with a whiff of ISIS leanings shouldn't be able to have guns.

This guy was interviewed twice by the FBI. That alone should mean no firearms.

Do you want to live in a society where your constitutional rights can be taken away simply because a single government body decides to interview you? Due process exists for a reason.

 

[NutBucket]

There's already plenty of federal regulation AND this guy passed NICS and the extra background checks needed to obtain licenses pertinent to his employment as security guard.

At any rate, the guy raised plenty of red flags with lots of folks who didn't do anything about it. He "beat" his ex-wife, for example. So it's not as if he suddenly snapped without warning.

You all are sure quick to take away Constitutional Rights. If you want a totalitarian government, move to China or North Korea. Most Americans enjoy their freedoms and, most importantly, realize freedom isn't free.

 

[Paladin3]

The hardest to blame are guns and Muslims because they have the most crazy extremist defenders.

So we're crazy for wanting our constitutional rights? But the folks who rabidly suggest the impossible - disarming America, both law-abiding and criminal alike - are the sane and reasonable folks?

I've asked for it over and over and over, but nobody has even once explained how they are going to disarm all of America and especially it's criminal elements who won't give up their guns willingly. What you folks suggest can't be accomplished without starting a civil war. It's just not possible.

Advocating for zero guns in America is as silly as thinking alcohol prohibition and the failed drug war were good ideas and actually worked. Have you folks learned nothing???

And you call gun advocates crazy?!?!?!

 

[shimpster]

dumb turdz

 

[Paladin3]

If you had mandatory psych testing for gun ownership, it would turn up issues long before they became manifest. Mental illness isn't like a witch's curse. You don't wake up one day and suddenly you're insane.

We can't even get the country to agree that people should have to prove who they are and that they are a citizen before voting. Allowing government to set up another bureaucracy to decide who does and doesn't get to exercise their constitutional rights is a very bad idea.

Better we try to solve this from the other direction by improving our mental health care system.

 

[Charmonium]

You all are sure quick to take away Constitutional Rights.

Where do you get that from? I was raised around guns. I remember the first time my dad took me quail hunting. You're falling into the false dichotomy that the NRA has created for you - either no regulation or guns will be banned.

There are very few "rights" that come w/o some sort of restriction. The right to free speech for example doesn't give you the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. So the idea that gun ownership should be unconditional is absurd. It's like saying everyone should be allowed to drive or fly an airplane. Except you can probably kill more people with a semiauto than a car.

Now if you accept the idea that some sort of regulation is needed, then why not accept that it is needed on the national rather than state level? In New Jersey, we have a variety of restrictions on gun ownership but people still own them legally. There's no way that we would ever have an outright ban. That's being paranoid.

And as I said before, it's only a matter of time before we get more stringent regulations at the federal level. There are only so many of these shootings people are going to tolerate before they demand that something, anything be done. Wouldn't rather have the action taken be something rational and effective rather than the typical knee jerk response we normally get from Congress?

 

[NutBucket]

What new federal regulation is needed? Please explain what new checks can be implemented.

You want to talk about taking away rights? In CA I can simply inform the authorities I suspect you may be up to something (or a danger to yourself, etc) and all your guns can be confiscated and your right to purchase a weapon revoked without due process of any sort.

 

[Paladin3]

There's already plenty of federal regulation AND this guy passed NICS and the extra background checks needed to obtain licenses pertinent to his employment as security guard.

At any rate, the guy raised plenty of red flags with lots of folks who didn't do anything about it. He "beat" his ex-wife, for example. So it's not as if he suddenly snapped without warning.

If the wife has reported the abuse and he had been convicted, right there he would have lost his ability to legally own a gun. We tend to ignore bad behavior in this country until someone gets killed, then we wring out hands and point fingers trying to figure out who or how we could have prevented it.

Sometimes you just have to fight back against evil people when you can't stop them before they strike. I know that's hard to hear for some.

 

[Charmonium]

What new federal regulation is needed? Please explain what new checks can be implemented.

Honestly, I'm not sure. Psych exams like they give to police recruits would be one that I would favor but realistically, I don't see that going over very well.

The unfortunate fact is that the CDC has been prohibited from even gathering information on gun deaths so the only information we have is decades old.

It's not an easy question and to make an effective decision you need data which the NRA and their puppets in Congress have prevented us from getting.

 

[edro]

What new federal regulation is needed? Please explain what new checks can be implemented.

You want to talk about taking away rights? In CA I can simply inform the authorities I suspect you may be up to something (or a danger to yourself, etc) and all your guns can be confiscated and your right to purchase a weapon revoked without due process of any sort.

You could start by requiring a license and background check for all gun and ammunition purchases, country wide.
And better enforcement for revoking said license.
Guns and ammo are too easy to obtain.

And don't give me the lame "criminals already have guns" excuse.

 

[NutBucket]

Uh, federal law currently requires a background check for gun purchases. The so-called "gun show loophole" is a myth.

If criminals get their hands on guns illegally how would adding that regulation to ammunition make any difference? But it looks likely CA will pass a law requiring it...I feel safer already...

 

[NutBucket]

Honestly, I'm not sure. Psych exams like they give to police recruits would be one that I would favor but realistically, I don't see that going over very well.

The unfortunate fact is that the CDC has been prohibited from even gathering information on gun deaths so the only information we have is decades old.

It's not an easy question and to make an effective decision you need data which the NRA and their puppets in Congress have prevented us from getting.

If there were easy answers it would already be done.

Don't blame the NRA per se. Without them the left would have attempted to ban/confiscate all guns already. In reality it's a balancing act.

 

[Charmonium]

Uh, federal law currently requires a background check for gun purchases. The so-called "gun show loophole" is a myth.

If criminals get their hands on guns illegally how would adding that regulation to ammunition make any difference? But it looks likely CA will pass a law requiring it...I feel safer already...

You're absolutely right. There's dumbass legislation which is what we normally get and smart legislation for which we need good data.

But the problem is that the NRA has been so intransigent for so long that what we'll probably get is dumbass legislation, like an assault weapon ban. It's not even possible, with any specificity, to define what an AW even is so how are you going to ban them? And banning them w/o any other restrictions implies that normal carbines or long rifles aren't just as much of a problem.

It might turn out that there's nothing we can realistically do that will be 100% effective. But we have to try because this sort of thing just can't continue.

 

[edro]

Uh, federal law currently requires a background check for gun purchases. The so-called "gun show loophole" is a myth.

Wrong. Please don't pretend you know what you're talking about.

I go to plenty of gun shows and I can tell you, without a doubt, there is NO background check for gun purchases made there.
Only pistols from FFL dealers.
There aren't even background checks required for rifles or shotguns in Ohio from brick and mortar stores.

 

[Paladin3]

Where do you get that from? I was raised around guns. I remember the first time my dad took me quail hunting. You're falling into the false dichotomy that the NRA has created for you - either no regulation or guns will be banned.

There are very few "rights" that come w/o some sort of restriction. The right to free speech for example doesn't give you the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. So the idea that gun ownership should be unconditional is absurd. It's like saying everyone should be allowed to drive or fly an airplane. Except you can probably kill more people with a semiauto than a car.

Now if you accept the idea that some sort of regulation is needed, then why not accept that it is needed on the national rather than state level? In New Jersey, we have a variety of restrictions on gun ownership but people still own them legally. There's no way that we would ever have an outright ban. That's being paranoid.

And as I said before, it's only a matter of time before we get more stringent regulations at the federal level. There are only so many of these shootings people are going to tolerate before they demand that something, anything be done. Wouldn't rather have the action taken be something rational and effective rather than the typical knee jerk response we normally get from Congress?

Murder is already illegal. Isn't that what we are really trying to stop here? How many more laws do we need?

There are a whole host of REASONS that will prevent you from legally buying a gun. Lots of laws are already in place. That still doesn't prevent someone from slipping through the cracks or buying a gun illegally.

America has guns deeply ingrained in her psyche. Very few will give them up willingly. I dare say there is no way to confiscate them all without ending our free and democratic society and starting a civil war.

If you have ideas beyond "something rational and effective" be done, please share them.

This is the crux of the problem, IMHO. People are going to vote politicians the power to do something "rational and effective" out of frustration, when the goal of looking into the future and preventing crimes like this before they happen is essentially impossible.

I'll say it again: sometimes all you can do is fight back against evil when it rears its ugly head. You can't always kill it before it strikes.