0
normiss

Is America finally ready to talk about guns?

Recommended Posts

Quote

The goal should be an effort to reduce senseless mass murder.



OK (for at least the third time in this thread), how?

Quote

Why are you defending mass murder?



Oh, this is good. I am defending mass murder? Because I'm not jumping on the "We must do SOMETHING!" train?

Let's me be perfectly clear; I am against murder, mass murder, medium murder, ALL murder.

I have asked you 3+ (now 4+) times in this thread alone, what do you propose? I am willing to discuss ways to decrease the number of firearm related fatalities each year in the US. I keep trying to move the coversation forward. You refuse to discuss solutions.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

To me it would not be even close to worth the cost. So little is gained in your society by having such rights, and so much is lost. But I do agree that the majority of Americans feel this freedom is important.



Quantify what is gained and what is lost. You say it as a fact that the gains are small and the costs are high. How did you come to this conclusion? What are the gains? What are the losses?

What makes you right and so many others wrong?

Derek V




I'm not claiming to be "right". I could just as easily ask you what makes America's gun culture right and the rest of the world wrong. What is gained? The satisfaction of being able to have and carry powerful weapons, and all the warm feelings that gives you. To me, that is not worth much. What is lost? A firearm death rate at least 5 times that of the rest of the western world. Toddlers accidentally killing other children and angry men shooting other people in a moment of weakness and rage. Etc. Not worth it in my view.

Americans get very emotional about their right to carry weapons. I only partly understand this.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm not claiming to be "right". I could just as easily ask you what makes America's gun culture right and the rest of the world wrong. What is gained? The satisfaction of being able to have and carry powerful weapons, and all the warm feelings that gives you. To me, that is not worth much. What is lost? A firearm death rate at least 5 times that of the rest of the western world. Toddlers accidentally killing other children and angry men shooting other people in a moment of weakness and rage. Etc. Not worth it in my view.

Americans get very emotional about their right to carry weapons. I only partly understand this.



OK, so it is only your opinion that the gains are small and the loses are huge. OK. I don't agree. Where does the conversation go from here?

Realize that if you want to discuss limiting my constitutionally guaranteed rights, it is going to take a lot more that an opinion that they should be restricted.

We are not going to repeal or restrict the 1st amendment because of a few groups protesting funerals. It is part of the price we pay for the 1st amendment.

I am not for protesting funerals because I am for the BOR's any more than I am for mass murder because I am for the BOR's.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can understand the right to a weapon, to a degree.
I still fully support the 2nd, just not the insane "moar guns for everybody because it's our right too bad bitches be dying" attitude.
It's as insane as the mass murderers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whatever is proposed need to give a little instead of just take.

I.E.: In exchange for increased background checks, CCW is allowed in unsecured gun free zones, but restrictions for unlawful usage are doubled.
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Realize that if you want to discuss limiting my constitutionally guaranteed rights, it is going to take a lot more that an opinion that they should be restricted.




I do realize that. I believe that your country would be better off without the 2nd Amendment and with fewer guns. I also believe that it is never going to be repealed and that you will likely end up with more and more guns. And more and more killings.

Killing is what guns are made for. I know yours are just for protection, or they are toys. But their only real function is killing. And that's what more and more of them will be used for.

Like I said, the genie is out of the bottle.

What is your opinion of the gains you get from your guns? What do they give you that makes them so important?
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

What do you propose?



Anyone?

Derek V



-Background check for anyone looking to purchase a gun
-No limit to how many or what types of guns you can own
-Mandatory safety classes specific to the type of firearm you are purchasing
-Safety class instructors are trained to spot red flags in their students behavior and are able to delay the purchase of the gun until an investigation can be completed

Obviously there are a lot of kinks to work out and details to figure out, but it's how I would start.
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A well thought reply.

Quote

What is your opinion of the gains you get from your guns? What do they give you that makes them so important



Fair question. They give me the ability to defend myself, my family, and my home. I refuse to be a helpless victim. 911 is great, but for when it is not enough, I will be able to protect myself.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

The goal should be an effort to reduce senseless mass murder.



OK (for at least the third time in this thread), how?



You could start by looking at and learning from the rest of the Western World, where mass shootings are far less prevalent. It isn't like having less than 7 mass shootings in a week is impossible.

If you believe that dead people is a fair price to pay for your right to carry firearms around, would you substitute your family for the 50 killed in Orlando?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
normiss

I'll be happy to start.

Raised with guns in military family, I have pretty much always owned weapons.
Nothing more than handguns, couple of rifles, a few scatter guns for different reasons.
I was a registered Republican for a very long time, until after serving in the Navy.
Biggest reason I wanted out was that while I love the technology I was working with, it served but one purpose, deliver death as rapidly and efficiently as possible.
I was also a long standing supporter of the NRA, until they became politicized beyond logic.
I've really grown tired of seeing fellow citizens slaughtered over nothing.
While I still fully support the Second, personally, I think it's past time to have an honest, serious discussion about our current guns laws that either fail us or are simply ignored.

Why do legal gun owners NOT support expanded background checks?
Why do so many people feel the need to own military type long guns?

I'm not for banning them (although I also think the FFL for machine guns program could go away), but why would we not want to watch that even a little bit closer? What's wrong with tightening the requirements? The Average Joe has no business nor need to own such weapons in my mind.

I just don't understand why so many are will to standby and watch their fellow citizens slaughtered simply because of hatred and simply shrug it off like it's just a reality show.

Flame on bitches.:P



I am much like you. Military family and background.

My attitude is this: rights and RESPONSIBILITIES.

I see this as the way forward. Bear with me.

In order to exercise one's 2A rights, one must also adhere to the other part of 2A..the well-regulated militia.

That is, if you're going to own a firearm, you must also attend drill sessions, to be part of the "well-regulated militia"; i.e., able to load and fire one's weapon on command.

There would be some subjectivity, but I have a strong suspicion that if the proper cadre is selected and allowed to enforce (careful with that word, Eugene) who is permitted to be a member of the militia (and more importantly, who is not), this problem would self-govern away.

Rights are important. The 2nd Amendment should be a testament that the people can govern themselves, much as the USPA shows that skydivers can govern themselves. We have rights, but we also have responsibilities.

Not saying that parachutes are in the same class as boomsticks. Far be it. Yet, the concept is the same. I think there should be a governing body that acts in concert with the people AND with the federal legislation....I am uncertain as to whether the NRA is it. Perhaps it is because they have been historically demonized that they do not fit this narrative.

I agree with you that confiscation won't happen. In order for this to take place, 2A must be repealed. This would require 2/3rds of the states ratify...ain't gonna happen.

.
"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for moving the conversation forward.

Background check for anyone looking to purchase a gun

We have that in Colorado. It is unenforceable and has done nothing, except to place undue burden on legal gun owners.

-No limit to how many or what types of guns you can own

I agree with the current limits in most states. For example, the only limit I would change in Colorado is the magazine limit. This one is also unenforceable and has had no impact expect to place undue burden on legal gun owners.

-Mandatory safety classes specific to the type of firearm you are purchasing

I'm not completely opposed to this. As long as the cost associated with the training does not prevent the poor from legally buying a firearm. These types of requirements have been used in the past to limit freedoms.

-Safety class instructors are trained to spot red flags in their students behavior and are able to delay the purchase of the gun until an investigation can be completed

This is a very broad and vague proposal. I like it, but the details would need to be ironed out. There is a lot of room for abuse. There could be limited effectiveness when an instructor is motivated to generate a reputation for passing very one to generate more revenue from more students.

How many fatalities would these changes have prevented in the last year?

Thank you again for moving the conversation forward.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And with the genie being so out of the bottle, you may have at least some justification there. But if you lived in a place with far fewer guns you would have less fear of being attacked and needing to defend. Chances are though, that if someone comes for you they will anticipate that you may also be armed and take you down while they have the drop on you. It's hard to win an arms race.

So to deal with that people do things like keeping a loaded gun handy while they sleep. Those are the ones the children have accidents with. And that road rager who thinks you cut him off? He won't give you a fair chance to draw in the main street. He'll shoot you from behind.

Those are some of the reasons I'm glad we don't have such unrestricted access here. Although in parts of Canada your guns are leaking across the border and into the hands of gangs. We can own guns here, but acquisition involves quite a few hoops to jump through. More types are outlawed. And storage and handling rules are strict.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

Quote

There were 7 mass shootings in America last week.
It's becoming our national reality show. I refuse to accept that.



It is what the Founding Father's designed and what your vaunted constitution has created. You want all this freedom, then with it comes the freedom to perpetrate mass shootings. Simply the price to pay.



Nice one -- that's pretty much where the discussion ends IMO.

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You could



I'm not claiming there is a problem. Therefore I am not going to look for solutions.

Quote

If you believe that dead people is a fair price to pay for your right to carry firearms around, would you substitute your family for the 50 killed in Orlando?



This is an emotional based argument. Would you substitute your family in the fatal car accident for your ability to drive your car?

Why are you for protesting funerals? You must be for protesting funerals if you are pro 1st amendment.

This is silly and emotion-based arguments. It does nothing to move the conversation forward. If you want to have a serious discussion, I will discuss the issue. If you want to just going to the sensational route, I'm not going to bother.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's something that could be done, make the use of a gun in any crime a mandatory 20 year no probation crime.

Of course we won't do it....to expensive.....to unfair to minorities....

But if we want to be arm to the teeth and cut down on SOME gun violence it would help.
Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's hard to win an arms race



Not trying to win an arms race. If someone plans to murder me and does a bit of homework, I'm screwed. Guns doesn't change that. Either side of the equation. I'm not trying to outgun everyone else. I'm taking responsibility for my and my family's safety. I am not going to rely on a cell phone to protect me.

For gun control, the low hanging fruit is gone. To make any sort of significant impact on annual firearm fatalities, it would require a large restriction on he 2nd amendment. That is why you are not seeing anyone put forth solid ideas to limit firearms related fatalities. We are at the point of diminishing returns.

Derek V

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


I'm not claiming there is a problem.



If 7 mass shootings in a week is not a problem in your world, then there really is no arguing with you. Like trying to explain to Hannibal that the problem isn't with the Chianti but with the human meat.

Quote

This is an emotional based argument.



So you wouldn't. You don't mind the price paid, as long as you aren't the one paying.

Quote

Would you substitute your family in the fatal car accident for your ability to drive your car?



No, but then I would look at how to make my family safer in a car. You have already indicated you have no problems with mass shootings....well as long as your family isn't involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

To make any sort of significant impact on annual firearm fatalities, it would require a large restriction on he 2nd amendment. That is why you are not seeing anyone put forth solid ideas to limit firearms related fatalities.




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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Why do legal gun owners NOT support expanded background checks?



most do, the politicians will not move on it.

Quote

Why do so many people feel the need to own military type long guns?



Mostly penis size, because there is no other valid explanation. 'fighting the corrupt government' is pretty lame, no one has done that since the Civil War, nor has there been a threat that rises to that level.

Oh, and the 2nd rights....it is my right, so therefore I will, even if that gun sits in my closet 364 days a year, and I never use it, and it is not at the ready, and no one is actually coming to my door to kill me, and even if every stat says I am not safer with that gun..... and seemingly even if it allows nut jobs to buy the same gun and kill innocent people.....I will not ever give one millimeter to improve things.

There is no 'perfect solution' therefore I will support no solution until I see one.

It is penis size, ego, stubbornness and ineptitude to be able to understand basic statistical evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is an emotional based argument.



So is your stated reason for carrying guns. Studies routinely show that having firearms in the house increases the odds of violent death.

Since you seem to think that statistics don't apply to you, your argument in favour of owning guns is already emotion based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bolas

Whatever is proposed need to give a little instead of just take.

I.E.: In exchange for increased background checks, CCW is allowed in unsecured gun free zones, but restrictions for unlawful usage are doubled.



Last I Checked . . . That bar was a gun free zone.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No.

Anything that passes for a 'discussion' is reminiscent of the suggestion that crazy people should be paired up so that it is not so obvious that they are talking to themselves.

One of the problems is quite who has firearms. It's like Harleys were in the bad old days - the only people with them were cops and outlaws.

Ironically enough, one of the sticking points in granting citizenship to freed slaves was the prospect of them being armed. It was argued in Congress that, if negroes had guns, they would be blasting away at anything that moved. Of course that was pure racism at work, and it's not like you can tell what neighborhood you're in by the smell of burnt cordite...

In any event, the antis are convinced that without guns society would be free from gun violence like, say, Rwanda, that only has a bit of machete violence, which is much, much better.

The pros are convinced that the antis are so full of shit that any attempt at cooperation is doomed.

The issue could be addressed, but the disease of denial that blinds the Powers that Be regarding who is doing all the shooting makes the pursuit of progress an exercise in futility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0