More mass shootings

[piisfish 135]

Hooknswoop

Quote

So it's YOUR TURN - You come up with something that might be acceptable that would completely remove random mass shootings and decrease the criminal gun murder rate and I'll give it consideration.

Why would I do that? I’m ok with how things are.

Derek V

Regarding abortion, do you consider yourself as pro-life or pro-choice ?

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[RonD1120 58]

billvon

>There's been one law so far that seemed to really make a difference about gun crime.
>Stop and Frisk.

So let's try that. For _everyone._

OK by me.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DJL 232]

RonD1120

***>There's been one law so far that seemed to really make a difference about gun crime.
>Stop and Frisk.

So let's try that. For _everyone._

OK by me.

Then you and your wife are first. Every time you roll into a gas station, grocery store or drive within a mile of a public gathering you and your wife are going to have a cop run their hands over your bodies, up your pants, across your chests, ask you two to spread your butt cheeks and jump up and down to see if anything falls out. Yes, that's stop and frisk.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[RonD1120 58]

DJL

******>There's been one law so far that seemed to really make a difference about gun crime.
>Stop and Frisk.

So let's try that. For _everyone._

OK by me.

Then you and your wife are first. Every time you roll into a gas station, grocery store or drive within a mile of a public gathering you and your wife are going to have a cop run their hands over your bodies, up your pants, across your chests, ask you two to spread your butt cheeks and jump up and down to see if anything falls out. Yes, that's stop and frisk.

I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile. Profiling is the first half of stop and frisk.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Lawndarter 3]

RonD1120

I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile. Profiling is the first half of stop and frisk.

You never fail to miss the point, do you buds?

[gowlerk 1,918]

Quote

I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile. Profiling is the first half of stop and frisk.

Nice one there Ron. If you were one who fit the profile you would probably understand some things better. Like taking a knee, and thinking that White Lives Matter!

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[Lawndarter 3]

millertime24

. And how do you fix the firearm suicide issue? There have been 21,386 suicides by firearms according to (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm).

By making firearms a whole lot less accessible.

Australia's experience is instructive. After their post-Port Arthur gun buyback, firearm suicides dropped significantly. Non-firearms suicides did increase slightly, but on net suicide rates dropped.

There's a fairly simple explanation for why, too. Suicides are generally impulse acts. Suicide by firearm is normally is completed, while many other methods have higher survival/intervention rates. There is a reason, for example, that while females attempt suicide far more often than males, more male suicides are completed - they choose methods more likely to be "effective".

Further, someone who survives a suicide attempt is actually quite unlikely to die by suicide - "Says HSPH Professor of Health Policy David Hemenway, the ICRC’s director: “Studies show that most attempters act on impulse, in moments of panic or despair. Once the acute feelings ease, 90 percent do not go on to die by suicide.”"

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923#t=article

The link's pretty clear - particularly the Harvard study mentioned above which compared states with varying rates of gun ownership. Want less suicides? Have less guns.

[normiss 622]

Quote

A- Work.
B- Not infringe on my rights.

Those of us opposed to mass murder would ask the same.
I don't understand why people have to die for you to go "pew!" (at a rapid repeating rate).

There are plenty of suggestions and good starting points repeatedly made, met with stone wall refusal.

[normiss 622]

That is exactly what you have said.

[wolfriverjoe 1,346]

RonD1120

*********>There's been one law so far that seemed to really make a difference about gun crime.
>Stop and Frisk.

So let's try that. For _everyone._

OK by me.

Then you and your wife are first. Every time you roll into a gas station, grocery store or drive within a mile of a public gathering you and your wife are going to have a cop run their hands over your bodies, up your pants, across your chests, ask you two to spread your butt cheeks and jump up and down to see if anything falls out. Yes, that's stop and frisk.

I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile. Profiling is the first half of stop and frisk.

So what you are really ok with is "everyone else."

And it seems like the current "up and coming" profile for criminals & terrorists is "older white guy". Toss in a "Trump" bumper sticker or a Confederate flag and you have the profile of the ones most likely to commit a "mass shooting" or a Bombing.

So would you be ok with "stop & frisk" if you fit the profile?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[RonD1120 58]

I am legal and law abiding. I like and admire our LEOs. And, no I would not stand out as you described.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[gowlerk 1,918]

RonD1120

I am legal and law abiding. I like and admire our LEOs. And, no I would not stand out as you described.

And of course the police can tell that right away. Just by glancing at you. Just as they can tell that black men need to be stopped. Because every book has a cover to judge it by.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[normiss 622]

Except white, christian, American terrorists.
They cool. Patriots even.

[yoink 321]

Hooknswoop

Quote

If you were intending to use your firearms in a legal manner my suggestion would allow you to exercise your 2nd amendment rights with absolutely no limitations or restrictions on what type of or how many guns you can own and use, what ammo or modifications you might choose to use, or alter in any way how you went about using them.

Until your suggestion didn’t work because the server went down or whatever.

Getting the technology right would be part of the deal and I'm not saying that there wouldn't need to be new technology developed to make it work.

Would you be satisfied with 99.9% up-time?

In fact the more I think about it, the more I'm tempted to flesh the idea out and write to my senator with it, because even if it's shot down in flames it shows the pro-gun side for what the are - absolutely intransigent fanatics. There can be no acceptable negotiation. All your talk of solutions 'working' and 'rights infringement' is just a smokescreen. What you mean is 'no. Never. No matter what.'

And once the wider public have proof of that, maybe all the wasted negotiation and meaningless half-measures will stop and someone will actually impose a solution on you WITHOUT negotiation. and given that your opinions will be missing there's a good chance that the solution won't be particularly effective - just a removal of your 2nd amendment rights.

This is your chance to be part of the solution before that happens.

[normiss 622]

Reliable up-time always requires 5 9's.

[yoink 321]

normiss

Reliable up-time always requires 5 9's.

I totally thought you were talking about little blue pills for a second...



Fine. 99.999%

(fucking engineers and their numbers!)

[Rick 67]

Your solution doesn't address the self defense part of legal gun ownership.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[RMK 3]

RonD1120

I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile. Profiling is the first half of stop and frisk.

Profiling (as performed by US police) is merely another racial injustice. If performed according to your specs, the 64yr old white guy that shot up Las Vegas would be free to pass while the police checked out the "brown people"

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[yoink 321]

Rick

Your solution doesn't address the self defense part of legal gun ownership.

It addresses self defense in the home (no change), and given the restrictions on where firearms would be able to be used the liklihood of you needing self defense in a public space is massively reduced.

Do you know of a relatively non-biased source that shows the number and types of self defense incidents that guns have been used in across the country? I've no idea of the rough magnitude we're talking about.

There would also be fringe benefits - bank robberies, hostage situations etc.would become much less lethal.

And yes, there would be a long transition period where a lot of guns wouldn't have this technology in them - decades at least if not centuries, but over time the majority would, just like introducing a new currency. That's the scale of the issue.

There is no magic fix that will make the problems go away overnight or address every single negative point if there's going to continue to be legal gun ownership. All we can do is try to address a majority

[normiss 622]

I also support Scalia's position on the Second Amendment.

[billvon 2,417]

>I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile.

I said frisk _everyone._ Even underlined it so you wouldn't miss it.

Right now we stop and frisk blacks, and I know that's what you want, as you mention above. But my suggestion was do the same to _everyone._ No profiling. Are you a black guy with a hoodie? You get frisked. Are you a white guy living in an armed compound? You get frisked. (And if you have so much as a single unregistered suppressor, you go to jail for a long, long time.) Are you a normal looking guy checking into the Mandalay Bay with a suspiciously heavy bag? You get frisked. Does your daughter like to go to Starbucks in the morning? She gets frisked. A lot.

If you are OK with that, great. It could make a difference.

Just want to do the white-supremacy thing? Sorry, not on the table.

[RonD1120 58]

billvon

>I don't believe that for a second. We do not fit the profile.

I said frisk _everyone._ Even underlined it so you wouldn't miss it.

Right now we stop and frisk blacks, and I know that's what you want, as you mention above. But my suggestion was do the same to _everyone._ No profiling. Are you a black guy with a hoodie? You get frisked. Are you a white guy living in an armed compound? You get frisked. (And if you have so much as a single unregistered suppressor, you go to jail for a long, long time.) Are you a normal looking guy checking into the Mandalay Bay with a suspiciously heavy bag? You get frisked. Does your daughter like to go to Starbucks in the morning? She gets frisked. A lot.

If you are OK with that, great. It could make a difference.

Just want to do the white-supremacy thing? Sorry, not on the table.

Seriously? Are you proposing stopping and frisking everyone who is outside their residence? If that is what you are putting on the table it is an impossible task.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[billvon 2,417]

>Seriously? Are you proposing stopping and frisking everyone who is outside their residence?

As many people as possible in public.

>If that is what you are putting on the table it is an impossible task.

So you are all for stop-and-frisk the blacks, but to expand beyond that would be impossible.

About what I expected.

[normiss 622]

Wow. Seriously.

[Rick 67]

yoink

It addresses self defense in the home (no change), and given the restrictions on where firearms would be able to be used the liklihood of you needing self defense in a public space is massively reduced.

Do you know of a relatively non-biased source that shows the number and types of self defense incidents that guns have been used in across the country? I've no idea of the rough magnitude we're talking about.

There would also be fringe benefits - bank robberies, hostage situations etc.would become much less lethal.

And yes, there would be a long transition period where a lot of guns wouldn't have this technology in them - decades at least if not centuries, but over time the majority would, just like introducing a new currency. That's the scale of the issue.

There is no magic fix that will make the problems go away overnight or address every single negative point if there's going to continue to be legal gun ownership. All we can do is try to address a majority

to the boded question: I don't know of a good source for that info. I do know that the number of times that people have defended themselves is less than 0. I got my CWFL so I can carry to protect myself and my family and I do not want to lose that right.

I do not see anything wrong with gun registration. Kind of like a title that follows the gun from owner to owner like we have with vehicles.

I agree that whatever changes are made now the effects may not be seen for a long time. But if we do nothing then nothing will ever change.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!