The Well-Mannered Politics Thread

[SepticeyePoe]

Come on now take self defense? I am going to have worry about fighting off a well fit 21 year old armed with a knife trying to rob me when I turn 75 years old? My best defense is being a legally armed citizen or risk being brutally hacked up, because in American Inner Cities, young robbers have no regard for human life and don’t like leaving witnesses. I will gladly give up my guns when the government can guarantee me and my family’s complete safety. Until then, I am not giving up my best way to defend myself and my family. There are some sick people out there!

Ok, I can see what you mean. I wish I could come up with a better solution than guns, but I can't.

 

[52520Andrew]

this is my problem with the whole thing - how can nothing change after every single time this happens?

It may if the parties actually want to work together but good luck with that with the political climate right now. Think a lot of it has to do with people only talking to people they agree with or getting news from places that represent their opinion. The right gets a lot of flack on this front but it exists on the left as well for sure. Kinda like how every year on the forums the Ravens are gonna win the super bowl and some undrafted WR is going to be a stud. I actually learned a lot about this from the forums seeing it happen but it applies everywhere.

In terms of the mass shootings I’d say also toxic masculinity and the repression of emotion and the dichotomous media impressions of femininity - I’d say they contribute quite significantly to a fairly large number of these shootings

But you’re point about suicides is a very important one

We used to have a problem where gas ovens could run the gas without being on but once they were stopped in production suicides decreased because an easy and painless method was taken away

Yeah you can't put all of these mass shootings on just one thing, it all plays a role. I think a lot more study should be given to learning about mental illness and how the media could be influencing people.

 

[rossihunter2]

It may if the parties actually want to work together but good luck with that with the political climate right now. Think a lot of it has to do with people only talking to people they agree with or getting news from places that represent their opinion. The right gets a lot of flack on this front but it exists on the left as well for sure. Kinda like how every year on the forums the Ravens are gonna win the super bowl and some undrafted WR is going to be a stud. I actually learned a lot about this from the forums seeing it happen but it applies everywhere.



Yeah you can't put all of these mass shootings on just one thing, it all plays a role. I think a lot more study should be given to learning about mental illness and how the media could be influencing people.

that's true but i think if there are studies into how these things affect people then there absolutely have to be studies into how gun regulation/lack of gun regulation affects these incidents... (but NRA money is blocking even statistics from being compiled)

idk - it makes me sad and angry every time, and every time nothing happens

and then i get moments where i wish i was born in the USA just so i could run for office and then shout and scream at everyone
and then i come back to reality and realise im glad i wasnt born in the USA because i never had to be scared of shootings while i was a kid - and then that makes me feel sad and angry again because no kid should ever feel like that

 

[Inqui]

Nice post @Lost_In_Translation, if there is one thing I would add, suicides account for over half of all gun related deaths in the United States. Gun related suicide attempts are much more likely to be fatal(almost always) than other methods and account for about half of all suicide deaths. A course about the dangers of depression(a fairly common link with a lot of these mass shootings it seems as well) would be one I would certainly add.

Mental illness has been on the rise all around the world for a while now and it's an issue nearly every government should be looking at addressing (though this goes back to the healthcare debate tbh and mental health issues seem to be more popular to discuss during gun debates than healthcare ones - so to be it comes off more as a way to deflect from any discussion about gun control and that feels a little disingenuous but hey).

I think nearly every issue with guns in the US comes down an oversupply. And being realistic, that makes the proper regulation of them like you see elsewhere nearly impossible to properly enact. Basic economics says that if there are too many of something, the price will plummet and that makes them far more accessible. That's why I don't have an awful lot of respect for the argument that you can get illegal guns in Australia or the UK or wherever - sure you can but you've gotta pay through the nose and it's easier to get a knife and they do way less damage. And that's why significant gun attacks are an extreme rarity anywhere else. I feel like the best way to get any kind of meaningful change would be to focus on the supply issues: drawing a line somewhere and outright banning some of the more lethal guns, doing buybacks and a lot of the measures @Lost_In_Translation mooted would be a huge step in the right direction. Honestly I'd be looking at it as a 50-year issue at least.

The outright ban in Australia came shortly after John Howard's Liberals (the right-wing party) swept to power in a landslide. They had the Port Arthur massacre shortly afterwards and he was willing to burn the huge amount of political capital he'd acquired to enact meaningful and long-term change. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-know-what-you-stand-for-20180122-h0m1lb.html

In his biography, John Howard, Lazarus Rising, Mr Howard recalls how his attorney-general, Daryl Williams, reported that it was "all a little too difficult" after meeting with state police ministers, especially those from Western Australia and Queensland, and how the senior bureaucrat advising him had cautioned that what he was seeking was "too ambitious".

His response was that he had accumulated a huge stockpile of political capital with the landslide victory in the March election, and he was prepared to spend a good portion of it achieving the best possible result.

"This was an enormous tragedy. It had instilled fear into the country. People couldn't believe that this had happened in Australia and I had this big majority. Now, what's the point of having a majority if you don't do something with it?" he explains.

"One thing I've known about politics for a long time, is that when you inherit a lot of political capital, you can be certain of one thing, it will deplete. Now, you either deplete it through doing something effective, or you just watch it deplete. Because it will deplete. It's a law of nature."

Three days after the tragedy, Mr Howard invited then opposition leader Kim Beazley and the leader of then dominant crossbench party in the Senate, the Australian Democrats' Cheryl Kernot, to visit Port Arthur with him.

It's a good article if anyone's interested. And iirc I was the copyeditor for it so direct your hatemail for any typos to me. But I don't envision that kind of political push out of the US in any of our lifetimes. Look at what happened to Al Gore (and the flow-on effects from that...) and ask yourself whether any US politician is ready to go out of their way to die on that hill like John Howard was.

With that said though, I think the gun lobby completely won the argument after Columbine and Sandy Hook and nothing's going to change for the foreseeable future. If six- and seven-year-olds getting shot in school doesn't change anything nothing will. Which means there's no reason to think anything's going to change in the foreseeable future - you still get your guns in case the government or some hypothetical bloke comes after you but there'll also be another major shooting every couple of months like there already are. I'll be honest in that I'm glad I don't live in a country that's made that trade-off (and I suspect I speak for the majority of non-Americans tbh). Here's a good Financial Times article after the Vegas shooting from a guy who'd been shot in Afghanistan: https://www.ft.com/content/1aba6ec6-a9b8-11e7-93c5-648314d2c72c

Fortunately, in my case, the car door slowed the bullets. Nevertheless, one round tore into my left upper forearm, exited and then grazed my chest. The other one mangled my right forearm, broke all the bones and left me with an ugly scar that always makes an interesting conversation starter when my sleeves are rolled up. I got off better than my interpreter who was beside me and got shot in the back of the head. He also counts himself lucky as there was no brain damage and no serious nerves or arteries severed — just two missing teeth.

Today, thanks to nerve damage that couldn’t be repaired, I get by with a semi-functioning left hand. I’ve also acquired a few post-traumatic tics and the first-hand knowledge that there is absolutely no reason for any civilian to own such a weapon, that everything must be done to extinguish trafficking and the US gun lobby makes an entire nation look backward and primitive with its absurd arguments.

With more than 500 people injured, Nevada’s medical system is going to be overwhelmed for years to come by the need for specialised physio, psycho and occupational therapy treatment that demands doctors with battlefield experience rather than sports therapy training. Rather than waiting for the next attack, media outlets might commit to rolling coverage of what it’s like to live with the disfiguring injuries inflicted by such weaponry.

 

[K-Dog]

I'm a political science major(well it's one of my majors). We talked about this today in a class and coming up with a solution was part of the homework. This just was available and now I'm polishing(more like doing a complete overhaul) of the vernacular to make it academically appropriate. I'm going out to dinner with friends in an hour. I'll be done with this in ten minutes. I work quickly.

So thank you all for the push I needed.

I'm studying abroad. Not on vacation. I do have school out here.

I was simply saying that was a long, long, long post. It musta' took a long time to write.

 

[K-Dog]

Anyone who thinks mental illness has nothing to do with it ,,,, I don't know what to say...

I don't see how anyone who is mentally well adjusted and clear thinking can decide that shooting up a school ( or any place ) is a good and acceptable idea. That is just not rational thinking.

Does anyone know this kids back story?
Not excusing anything by any means.
But, good Lord this kid has had a shitty life. He was in a lot of pain. He didn't know how to deal with it in a healthy productive way. Again, not excusing anything, but damn that kid was in a bad, bad dark place.

 

[K-Dog]

Ultimately I enjoy going to the shooting range.
I take my daughter and my wife.
It's fun for us to track our progress as we get better at hitting the target at further distances.
Trying out different guns is fun.

 

[cobrajet]

Disclaimer: I have no issues with you as people. You're all good people. If you all told me you were in Denver and wanted to grab a dinner with me I would do it. I do not let other people's politics affect my opinions on people unless they come out and say stupid racist, anti-semitic, homophobic shit, and on the flipside people who say"we need to murder all white people" "Republicans honestly needs to kill themselves". Fuck those guys. Those people aren't politically bad, they're just shitheads in general. Just because I disagree with you guys on most aspects of the issue here does not mean I think you're a bad person. You're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine. That's the great thing about the United States and why I like free speech.


While I am in favor of keeping the second amendment.. This is an issue where I believe both sides are acting completely irrationally for completely different reasons. Let me explain.

You must know the full extent of my opinion. In an ideal world I believe that no guns would be phenomenal. If we operated under the assumption that all people can be changed, we could make all weapons illegal and live in a cookie cutter psuedo-utopia. The problem is in a country with 350 million people you're bound to have a few nutjobs. You're bound to have a few terrible people who just want the world to burn.

I'm a moderate republican but the majority of the republican there is fiscally speaking. But to a degree. Though the tax cuts are more tea party esq if anything and my family is actually losing money because my old man is an auditor. Socially I'm more inclined to be on the left. Pro gay marraige, pro choice(though if I knocked up a girl and was irresponsible I would take care of the kid myself. I'd raise the kid as a single parent if I had to. It was my fault). I'm anti racist, sexist, generally think Trump is an appalling human being and it's hilariously sad that he's President right now. Where I tend to be more in the middle is gun control. I'm a supporter of the second amendment.


What the second amendment states is, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This is where I understand and support the amendment. It's essentially a check on the government by ordinary citizens. While it seems like the United States is completely unstable politically notice how the citizens have never had to overthrow the damn government. Second amendment is a big reason why if you ask me. The government does respect the people but it also fears them to a degree. Something that is good. I don't want a government that's too powerful. Now one that's non-existent and relaxed is just as bad. This is where my issues with both parties lie.

The problem I have with it though is that the world has changed and it needs a degree of tweaking. I'm a believer that regulations are necessary to the issue, but banning it entirely is just an impossibility. Let me explain the problems I have with both parties on this issue.

Republicans: I do believe that for the most part that the republican party is moreso archaic (especially certain members of Congress like Ted Cruz) when it comes to social policy, but I actually understand why they don't want to ban guns. The republicans don't want the government to become too big. Something I agree with. A government that's too big eventually becomes impossible to control and becomes either oppressive or tyrannical. The second amendment more or less serves as a check by the federal government by the population. Something I don't believe should be taken away.

However I have just as many problems as them. The second amendment did not factor in the fact that technology was to change significantly. While other people do treat the constitution as a timeless living document, it was also open to tweaking. The republicans don't want any change because their stubborn as all hell and archaic socially. Some people will point to interest groups such as the NRA as being a primary catalyst but there are SO MANY interest groups that hold democrats over too. In fact the NRA has given some semblance of campaign contributions to 11% of democrats as well. They're powerful, very amongsts interest groups, but they're not the main reason the republicans are held over. Truth is, most politicians are fucking idiots. There are only four members in Congress overall that I actually don't hate(and I will not reveal that to any of you). Two democrats and two republicans. In the case of the republicans the issue is more obvious than not: their social views are a tad outdated. There's a problem and they want to do nothing. In fact they want to strip regulations. Which is a dumb idea.

While I do agree that the federal government is becoming too powerful for it's own good(especially the executive branch recently which I am not a fan of regardless of who is in office) and the state government should control more things than the federal, I do believe that a national precedent set by the federal government would do wonders for gun control. Certain regulations could go a long way. I.e making gun safety courses and training mandatory in all 50 states. Setting up a federal registry would be smart as well. More extensive background checks and allowing the FBI to do it's job when monitoring potential candidates would go a long way. Psychiatric screenings as part of the safety courses would go a long way as well. The problem with having gun laws that are too lax is that it becomes too easy to purchase one. In Nevada you can purchase an assault rifle. It takes forever to get it but it can still be done within a month. If you want to buy an assault rifle I say you have to go through some extensive training and even more courses. Kind of like how you need a special license to drive a mack truck. Difficult to get, but not too restrictive if you really want to get it.

That said in California it is WAY too hard to get a gun if you want to do so legally. Parts of California, especially in Los Angeles and San Jose are very dangerous. Criminals there do have guns and I would be hard pressed to have a way to defend myself against criminals who aren't going to follow the law anyway. Being too conservative leads to more gun deaths because idiots can get a hold of them too easily. Being too liberal makes it hard for the law abiding citizens who just want to defend their families(something I understand, my uncle in Anaheim was subject to a home invasion a few years ago where he couldn't be armed because he couldn't buy a gun).

So let me get this out of the way: @Ludy51 @K-Dog. You can't deny that in certain states it is way too easy to get a gun. The idea that doing ANYTHING regulation wise is going to infringe upon your freedoms is not realistic in the slightest. The government controls certain aspects of your life whether you want them too or not. Taxation is not theft it's necessary. I am 19. I just paid my damn taxes because I do have a job. Am I mad that the California government takes a lot from me? Yes, but California has nice roads and a decent police force in every major city except for San Jose. I'm fine with that. Adding certain rules is NOT going to infringe upon your freedoms. The most reasonable of the democrats actually agree with this statement. Hell, Reagan hated assault rifles and the republicans worshiped the man. Regulations are not only necessary, but they're going to happen. The American population is going to become impatient. While I agree that they're shouldn't be too MANY regulations, no change in policy at all = no progress. No bueno. Things cannot be the same, it's not 1791 anymore. Gun ownership is widespread, and technological advances have made things different. It's about damn time that the federal government take control of some of this problem. Now.. I do agree with you that too much regulation is a bad thing.

That leads me to my problems with the democrats on this issue.


Democrats:
Okay.. @The Raven has one of the most realistic solutions that a democrat I have encountered has actually proposed. Guns for cash exchanges would actually have a positive effect and they'd be entirely voluntary. That said the solution does have significant problems and should be PART of a greater solution rather than the main catalyst for change. I highly doubt that in dangerous cities that criminal overlords would give up their guns. There'd still be gang violence and whatnot but the number would probably go down. That said. I have 0 issues with this idea. I do think that needs to be part of a bigger plan and voluntary. And while the change would be small, it'd be a step in the right direction.

But herein lies my main issue with the democrats in general. Not just for gun control. While using statistics from other countries may seem good.. It's not completely applicable to the United States. A lot of the proposals are impossibilities that look REALLY good on paper but are just not feasible.

"Let's abolish the second amendment"-several people from Boulder and San Francisco that I know. Have fun with that. It takes FOREVER to make political change. Oftentimes that's for the best. While it may seem I hate the two party system that's not the case. Conflicting viewpoints are necessary. (The most prosperous overall states in this country are the states where there is still civil debate among the left and the right and they take time to pass good legislation that is effective. States that are too liberal(California) are approaching fucktons of debt and are going to screw themselves if they don't adapt. States that are too conservative(Arkansas) tend to be poor and cannot afford nicer things. Debate is a good thing. It allows people to see parts of their argument that could be inherently flawed). That said, solutions like this are just not feasible. There are an estimated 310 million guns in this country(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-child-and-then-some/?utm_term=.112164b94442). Good luck getting rid of them all. Now I do like the gun exchange solution from @The Raven. I don't think it'd make a significant dent, but it would help the amount of gun deaths go down. Undoubtedly a step in the right direction.

@rossihunter2. There are 350 million people in the United States. Almost five times bigger than the population of the United Kingdom. Sure, only about 30% of the population are registered gun owners, but that's the thing. REGISTERED. The United States is huge. Let's hypothetically ban guns for your sake. Your law abiding citizen listens. Hell, I would and I support the second amendment. I don't want to go Jail. A criminal doesn't listen at all. Arms dealers become a big thing given that there SO MANY guns already present in the country. It's close to impossible to acquire 350 million firearms. The black market doesn't attract your law abiding citizen typically. Drug dealers who have beef with one another would dedicate their resources to gun ownership and beef would still happen. Robbers would probably use some of their earnings to acquire firearms to make their jobs easier. Gang violence still happens. Muggings still occur. Not much changes at this point in the country's history. The time to ban guns was when the Constitution was being written. Your solution may have worked in the United Kingdom, but it would just fail here. In fact, crime would go up. Illegal firearms acquisitions would eventually lead to people getting caught and incarcerated, and there would likely still be gun deaths due to the black market. This actually makes the situation WORSE. No thank you. Phenomenal idea on paper. Fantastic. I'd support it 100% of the way if it were feasible. But it's not in the United States. Countries like China implemented firearms bans earlier in their country's history. The time for this solution has passed. It's a downright impossibility at this point in time and it would take at least a decade for this to even be put into place, let alone to accomplish confiscating firearms from law abiding citizens.

@SepticeyePoe. Criminals do not follow the law. They do not care. Most of them are desperate. They'll do whatever it takes to get the things they can. If you made guns illegal, they'd find a way to acquire them. It is inherent in the definition of the word criminal. They will still find a way especially given that there are so many guns in this damn country. This is where the situation becomes needlessly complicated. Look at how well the government ban on drugs did. I can still go find heroine. In fact, I have a dealer on Speed dial because I used to have a drug problem. And a gun is so much more effective than martial arts and cheaper in the long run. I would know. I've spent thousands of dollars over the past ten or so years while learning MMA, getting a black belt in Tae Kwon Do, etc. I'll be the first person to tell you this. If a person puts a gun to my head and tells me to give him his money I'm listening. Life is not an action movie. Point blank? I'm not risking dying over the $100 I usually carry in my wallet.

Leads me to another problem. Too much regulation isn't going to do shit in the long run. Regulate guns too heavily(not an outright ban but like California does it) and the black market is only going to get bigger. And the government CANNOT regulate a black market as large as this one is. It can barely regulate our economy as it is. Sure, mass shootings may go down a little, but overall crime levels are not going to go down. There will still be a way to shoot up a school.

Yes, in an ideal world we don't need guns. The world is not an ideal place. You have nut jobs, you have assholes, there are addictions, there are several problems in the world. Criminals will still be criminals. But the notion that nothing can be done is a falsehood. There are possible and reasonable solutions that would significantly help the problem go down.

I think the main issue I have with the democrats is that the majority of their solutions they propose don't factor in the context that the United States is a fundamentally different country than the UK or China or others. As a result several solutions that are proposed are good on paper but execution is either impossible or insanely difficult. While the republicans refuse to change(and are more responsible for the problem in my opinion), most of the solutions offered by the democrats are either totally unrealistic within the context to the United States' situation. Vastly different than what the U.K's or Australia's was at the time.

But the gun control issue is merely a microcosm of American Politics in general at the moment. The system itself is not the issue. I am a thorough believer that the two party system isn't the problem. The participants in Congress. That's a different animal. The extreme members of both parties are taking over within both parties in Congress. This bodes poorly. The republican party within itself is currently divided. There are people like John McCain who tend to be more towards the middle, and people like him are ostracized by people like Ted Cruz, who are so far gone right that I cannot support them. Democrats are divided too, people like Corey Booker(whom I have problems with but I am more fond of him than others) are more reasonable and realistic than a Bernie Sanders. Difference is Democrats do vote as one party. They're more organized at the moment. The infighting at the moment is the worst it's ever been. Neither side wants to listen to each other, and both sides demonize each other to the point where they just don't want to want to talk to each other. The founding fathers were brilliant when setting up our government. They understood that solely going towards one opinion all the time is a recipe for disaster.

The correct solution to almost every problem is not an easy one. Debate is necessary. Neither party wants to talk to each other right now. Not the fault of any president that the country is divided right now. Not the fault of any one political party either. The sad but honest truth about this country(and I wish I could change it too) is that progress takes time. Gun control in this country is not as simple as most of you think. Regulations do need to be added but too many regulations only makes the problem worse. I like certain solutions from members of both parties and I don't think implementing any of these would alienate other party members.

My solution would not solve the problem immediately, but this problem cannot be solved immediately given all of the variables.

1. The Federal government needs to set a precedent for firearms laws. This should not be a state issue in the slightest. Some states are too strict, others are too lenient. I don't want them doing this for everything, but there needs to be nationwide precedent.
2. Within this nationwide precedent the federal government should establish the following.

• Gun safety courses should be MANDATORY. The majority of actual gun deaths in this country are domestic disputes between family members and a good portion of those are ACCIDENTS. This alone reduces those significantly. If you want to own a firearm, make actual training to certain level of proficiency necessary. The NRA is actually in favor of this idea and I get it. If there are going to be legal gun owners, which is going to be reality by the way, at least make sure they're responsible.
• Make gun EDUCATION courses mandatory as well. Not just shooting. Proper care of your firearm, proper disassembly, make prospective gun owners take a fucking class on existing gun laws that ARE good and effective in this country. Proper storage of your firearm to prevent irresponsible gun owners from accessing it. Altogether though, guns are not nearly as complicated as cars. This process at most should take a month. This not only creates jobs(which conservatives love to point out when they talk about this idea to me) but it is not going to impede people from owning a firearm. This makes it harder to acquire a gun, but not impossible in the slightest.
• Only after completing safety and education courses should a person be allowed to be CONSIDERED to take a test for a firearms license. This test will ensure that you have proficiency with the weapon to prevent careless errors if you ever have to use it for self defense. It will ensure that a prospective gun owner knows how to properly store it. After they pass, they are given a license that permits the purchase of a firearm.
• With regards to concealed carry that should be its own permit that is accessible to ALL CITIZENS if they want it. Again, background checks and screenings are needed.
• Prospective gun owners during this process should obviously undergo extensive background checks and possibly psychiatric screenings. Yes mental illness does play a role in mass shootings even if it is overplayed by the conservatives. While these are not NEARLY as effective as most conservatives claim they would be, they do still hold effectiveness.
• If a person wants to consider purchasing a semi-automatic weapon they have to take further courses and will be subject to more background checks. Think of this like getting a different license in order to drive a mack truck.
• Fully automatic weapons, RPGs, etc should continue to be completely illegal throughout the majority of the country. Why are these kinds of weapons needed? Fully automatic machine guns are needlessly expensive anyway and mostly the elite could afford them if they were fully legal.
• Most cities implement @The Raven's idea. A lot of citizens will probably participate in this as not only could they use the money but it would work. It would only be slightly effective but it would be a step in the right direction. This problem is not going to fix itself overnight. It might not even be truly solved in 10 years.
• The FBI (which already monitors us btw so while it is doing so) should be allowed to act on potential threats. The kid yesterday was not only reported on by other students but had social media laced with evidence that he was going to participate in this behavior. Irresponsibility of the parents aside, he shouldn't have been allowed to purchase a gun. This sparks an entire debate entirely that I am not going to address. I don't have the time nor the patience for this one at the moment.
• Gun show loophole needs to be closed. It's how columbine happened. You should still have to register.
• Nationwide gun registry at best. State wise at worst.
• Firearms themselves are totally useless without ammo. Ammo should be more regulated than it is.

There. That's probably a little too in the middle, but it's better than doing nothing like the republicans want to do. It's far more realistic than banning guns entirely like the far left democrats want to do. Will this solve the problem entirely? No. Nothing will. But it does go a long way and the regulations put in place do NOT impede on your right to own a gun.

For the democrats the gun death rate would go down a good margin. Mass shootings would likely still happen as criminals would likely find a way to use the black market which has firearms anyway(I mean in most of these mass shootings that take place the firearm was purchased illegally anyway) but the number would go down as the gun show loophole is closed and this would limit a minor's restriction to guns HEAVILY. But the real impact here is the domestic disputes. These would go down SIGNIFICANTLY due to mandatory education and teaching. The accidents would likely be cut in half at worst. That number goes down and the numbers look good. You'll get a few statistical outliers in the short run, but in the long run this goes a longer way than you could possibly anticipate. Again, country of over 300 million, you're not going to be able to stop every mass shooting or crime, but this will put a dent in it in the short run and slowly reduce gun violence in the long run.

For the republicans if you think this honestly infringes upon your personal freedoms then you have become too sensitive. This forces people who want to own a gun to be responsible gun owners. While the ability to own a gun is well.. A right. The ability to purchase a gun should be treated as a PRIVILEGE. You're legally required to take drivers education if you want to buy a car or a plane. It does not impede on your freedoms at all. It is necessary because in the hands of an uneducated or bad person a car becomes a battering ram at best, or a bomb at worst that can level a building depending on the make of the car. Most prospective responsible gun owners are law abiding citizens with overall good track records. THIS WILL NOT AFFECT YOU. Your freedoms are not impeded at all. I know @K-Dog on a somewhat personal level. He's a reasonable human being with a good track record. He'd pass education with flying colors and would receive a firearms license anyway. Getting a gun license SHOULDN'T be easy. It's a weapon, only responsible people should be able to own one. But it shouldn't be impossible either.

Sorry for the long ass post. But I do tend to agree with @rossihunter2, @The Raven, @52520Andrew on one thing. There's a problem. It needs to be solved. The solution is not going to be easy or immediate. If a solution for a difficult problem appears to be too easy chances are you're not accounting for something. Republicans are the main issue though.

I do sadly think that nothing is going to happen. Unfortunate as it may be. One party is too stubborn, the other is too petty. Both hate each other. No progress will be made

I really enjoyed reading this post and I agree with most of it. I have some issue with the gun buyback programs and I have to admit my experience with them is limited to Baltimore City only. However, Baltimore City has a lot of gun violence, so you may be interested. Maybe they have good results in other areas and I would be interested in that, but in my experience - what a huge waste of taxpayer money! The only guns that were turned in were complete broken down rusted out pieces of junk that either would not work, I would never trust to defend myself, or I would never shoot in fear of it blowing up on me. It was either that or some poor older lady that had her late husband’s rare firearm that was worth big money and she was clueless about what she had (and it also had to be destroyed along with the rusted out piece of junk when it could have been sold to a collector and the money used to buy back more guns). There might not have been one firearm that I saw that I could say, “I am so glad that thing is off the street.” No criminals were turning in single gun. No one came in and said, “I live with someone who is mentally ill and I think I better turn this in.” There was so much money spent on junk that I wouldn’t have given you $2 for, it would make you sick, but hey if it sounded good to most people that 100’s of guns were now off the street after that day of buybacks because the general public was clueless on what they actually got for the city’s money which could have been much better spent elsewhere - what can I say?

 

[Sledge Hammer]

and yet everywhere else in the world that had problems with gun violence and got rid of guns has magically managed to reduce gun crime and mass shootings by orders of magnitude...

if background checks and licensing does nothing then you have to just get rid of guns period...

you cannot do nothing - that is unacceptable

Seriously?? That would only make more people rich by the black market. lol it isn’t that hard to craft a gun. I know a couple dudes that can take a rifle and craft it into an automatic. I first saw it done when I was 16. Making guns illegal is gonna mostly disarm the honest citizen. The criminal will find a way to obtain a gun. Funny!! How the more a total gun ban is lobbied the more of these shootings happen. It’s the tried and true strategy of the murderous communists!! Have people Trade away their rights and freedom for more protection and safety

 

[The Raven]

All I get from your post is you want to dictate what parts of our constitution we should ignore.
All I get from your post is you don't like guns so I should not be allowed to have one.
All I get from your post is guns not people are the problem.
All I get from your post is to punish the law abiding.
All I get from your post is this fantasy world where criminals will suddenly stop breaking the law if you make something illegal.

Yes I want to keep my firearms that I am completely legally allowed to own.
What is wrong with that?

What is wrong with that?

What is wrong with that?

In the constitution, the second amendment mentions a well regulated militia. Have you even read it? Or is this a comprehension issue? I think I know the answer.

 

[The Raven]

@Lost_In_Translation yeah, but let me read you some stats.

The U.S. has roughly 5 percent of the world's population, 42 percent of the guns, and 31 percent of the mass shootings. Those figures clearly show correlation, no? It even accounts for scaling issues. Roughly one in 20 people are Americans. Roughly one in three mass shooters are Americans. And Americans own close to half the guns on the fucking planet. Holy shit, what the fuck.

Gun control has worked in every other first world country. Australia hasn't had a single mass shooting in 20 years. This was our second in a week. Are we naturally more violent than other countries? I don't think the research bears that out, if you read the above story.

The reason Chicago's gun laws don't work, the reason state gun laws don't work, is because people can -- fucking imagine this -- drive to a different state. What a fucking novel concept. I shit you not, drive five minutes outside Chicago and the gun shops are lined up on the county line. It's not hard. We need federal gun control. Period. It works. Stop arguing. Stop letting your bullshit, insecure fetish destroy children's lives and families. Life's better on the other side.

I always hear about people saying, "If everyone had guns and were trained, this wouldn't happen."

Chris Kyle, the navy seal who was the subject of American Sniper, was armed when he killed by an unhinged man with a gun. A goddamn trained navy seal. Armed. Killed. Your argument is fucking bullshit, and you're a moron if you believe it.

17 children died so that gun nuts can stroke their AR-15s. Congrats, assholes.

 

[The Raven]

Good god kid. Aren't you supposed to be on vacation?
Go do something fun.

Stop. Stop that. I'm glad we have dudes like @Lost_In_Translation who actually give a damn. When did giving a damn and wanting to be civically engaged become a bad thing?

 

[Oldfaithful]

@Lost_In_Translation yeah, but let me read you some stats.

The U.S. has roughly 5 percent of the world's population, 42 percent of the guns, and 31 percent of the mass shootings. Those figures clearly show correlation, no? It even accounts for scaling issues. Roughly one in 20 people are Americans. Roughly one in three mass shooters are Americans. And Americans own close to half the guns on the fucking planet. Holy shit, what the fuck.

Gun control has worked in every other first world country. Australia hasn't had a single mass shooting in 20 years. This was our second in a week. Are we naturally more violent than other countries? I don't think the research bears that out, if you read the above story.

The reason Chicago's gun laws don't work, the reason state gun laws don't work, is because people can -- fucking imagine this -- drive to a different state. What a fucking novel concept. I shit you not, drive five minutes outside Chicago and the gun shops are lined up on the county line. It's not hard. We need federal gun control. Period. It works. Stop arguing. Stop letting your bullshit, insecure fetish destroy children's lives and families. Life's better on the other side.

I always hear about people saying, "If everyone had guns and were trained, this wouldn't happen."

Chris Kyle, the navy seal who was the subject of American sniper, was killed by an unhinged man with a gun -- while armed. Your argument is fucking bullshit.

17 children died so that gun nuts can stroke their AR-15s. Congrats, assholes.

I'm partially intoxicated at the moment and just came off of a horrible mental breakdown so addimttantly my comprehension at the moment is a bit down but I am in very much favor of federally controlled gun regulations. Where you and I probably differ is the EXTENT of the regulations but at that point we're arguing semantics and boom: once we start doing that no progress is made in general. Just because my opinion differs than others doesn't mean I hate them. I didn't take @K-Dog 's comment personally in fact I'm pretty sure he was concerned that I just wrote a really long post when I'm supposed to be out having fun. Something I think many people were concerned with lol.

I do have to say to @52520Andrew that I am well aware of the suicide fact(enter it's always sunny joke/Logan Paul joke here). But that's why I included necessary mental screenings. I feel as if a good psychiatrist would make a few prospective patients break this way and help weed some deaths out, thus reducing the problem. It may not solve the problem immidiately like @Inqui suggests but I do feel as if my plan is a step in the right direction. It won't solve the problem ASAP, but this problem can't be solved ASAP. It's a heavily populated country, most problems in the country CAN'T be solved ASAP. Not ideal, but reality.

Also fuck you @52520Andrew. I have a back end pick in the game again and it's your fault. Forget Ted Cruz, the most corrupt politician is YOU

 

[K-Dog]

Stop. Stop that. I'm glad we have dudes like @Lost_In_Translation who actually give a damn. When did giving a damn and wanting to be civically engaged become a bad thing?

LiT was correct.
I simply thought the ( seemingly ) massive amount of time it took to write that post could have been better spent seeing sights most would not otherwise have the opportunity to see.

 

[RavensMania]

In the constitution, the second amendment mentions a well regulated militia. Have you even read it? Or is this a comprehension issue? I think I know the answer.

This was unnecessary

 

[Sledge Hammer]

@Lost_In_Translation yeah, but let me read you some stats.

The U.S. has roughly 5 percent of the world's population, 42 percent of the guns, and 31 percent of the mass shootings. Those figures clearly show correlation, no? It even accounts for scaling issues. Roughly one in 20 people are Americans. Roughly one in three mass shooters are Americans. And Americans own close to half the guns on the fucking planet. Holy shit, what the fuck.

Gun control has worked in every other first world country. Australia hasn't had a single mass shooting in 20 years. This was our second in a week. Are we naturally more violent than other countries? I don't think the research bears that out, if you read the above story.

The reason Chicago's gun laws don't work, the reason state gun laws don't work, is because people can -- fucking imagine this -- drive to a different state. What a fucking novel concept. I shit you not, drive five minutes outside Chicago and the gun shops are lined up on the county line. It's not hard. We need federal gun control. Period. It works. Stop arguing. Stop letting your bullshit, insecure fetish destroy children's lives and families. Life's better on the other side.

I always hear about people saying, "If everyone had guns and were trained, this wouldn't happen."

Chris Kyle, the navy seal who was the subject of American Sniper, was armed when he killed by an unhinged man with a gun. A goddamn trained navy seal. Armed. Killed. Your argument is fucking bullshit, and you're a moron if you believe it.

17 children died so that gun nuts can stroke their AR-15s. Congrats, assholes.

How many of these shootings happen in Texas?? Texas has one of the lowest shootings per person in the country. If not the lowest. And citizens can get permits there. I’ll acknowledge there should by more thorough background and psychiatric testing. Similar to security clearance needed for many technology and government jobs. Many criminals will think twice b4 robbing or shooting if he or she is worried somebody else has a gun to. These shootings I know look and are terrible. But the downright massacres of unarmed people by a communist government is far more tragic. Your talking millions and millions of unarmed people murdered by their communist government.

 

[cobrajet]

Ok, I can see what you mean. I wish I could come up with a better solution than guns, but I can't.

I do too. Hearing the screams from those kids on the videos from that shooting yesterday is just heartbreaking. Even though I am very proficient with firearms, you may be surprised to know that even as a police officer and a conservative, I don’t really own many firearms. I have a handgun similar to my service weapon (used for off duty) and for home protection I prefer a 12 gauge pump shotgun.
I was never all that into firearms. I don’t own a high powered rifle, but I do worry about being out-gunned one day. There is no bullet proof vest that can stop a high powered rifle shot. I have a friend and he has 14 of those AR15’s. When he told me that, I was really concerned because my first thought was, “if someone breaks in your house, a criminal is now going to have 14 AR15’s, and he is going to sell them off to people who will never register them and there will be 14 AR15’s floating around out there.” He invited me to his house and I saw he has a huge high dollar safe he keeps them in and there is no way a criminal is getting into it or carrying it out, so he is responsible in that respect. I worry now, what happens if someone knows about his weapons and does a home invasion and puts a gun to his head and makes him open the safe? What happens to these guns when he dies?
I am open to listening to ideas on how to make things more safe in this country as far as gun safety. I feel measures should have been put into place decades ago, but we have to start sometime, so let’s start talking about how we can tighten things up now and do something ASAP.
I will close with this....since most people (they think they do but they don’t) really don’t know how bad things are in Baltimore and other high crime drug infested areas....let me tell you - there are more unregistered guns floating around in criminal hands than you could possible fathom. If criminals are not carrying them then they are very close to where they can get their hands on one. It is easier to find a drug stash, because it has to be easily accessed and the dealers go to it often, but they hide their guns pretty well and are harder to find because they are not going to it every 15 minutes. It seems like every time we execute a search warrant at a stash house or dealer’s house we find guns and when we go back we find more guns. It never ends. I know all the liberals want to take away stop and frisk and aggressive policing in high crime areas, but when we were told to do this, we seized a lot of guns daily and murders went from 330 a year to under 200 and criminals were not carrying guns on them anymore (even though they were still close by to one). Now that we were told to back off, crime is out of control, everyone is carrying again and murders are up to 330 again. We can debate the politics of that later because I say all that, to say this....Until this problem is dealt with - I am totally closed minded to anyone wanting to ban firearms in this country....period....end of story!!!!! And if you live in another country and don’t live near this shit you can shut the #$*@ up!!!!! My parents live in the suburbs and are afraid to come out their door because things have gotten so bad. They really believe someone is going to break in and kill them and the only peace they get is the fact they keep a gun by their bed. They are scared to death and it is sad because when I see a pin map of home invasions in their area, their fears are completely legitimate.

 

[cobrajet]

and yet everywhere else in the world that had problems with gun violence and got rid of guns has magically managed to reduce gun crime and mass shootings by orders of magnitude...

if background checks and licensing does nothing then you have to just get rid of guns period...

you cannot do nothing - that is unacceptable

I swear if I ever found a lamp and rubbed it and a Gennie popped out and granted me one wish, but said I could not use it to create the utopian world you dream in. I swear I would use my one wish to make you live in the McCulloh Homes projects of Baltimore City for a period of one year and you would have to bring all your current possessions and loved ones with you, and you and your family could not have access to a gun, and your children would have to go to Baltimore’s public schools. Since I am not cruel, you would wake up after that year period to find it was all a dream, but I would love to read your posts after this experience. It would be totally worth wasting my wish on.
I would like to be the post officer for your public housing address and give you special attention during my 8 hour shift when I was not handling other calls for service, serving summonses, out on arrests, backing up other officers, on a traffic accident, on a hospital detail, or all the many other duties an officer must perform. I would like to be there to write all the police reports when you witnessed a crime and see if you showed up to testify all the times needed in a Baltimore City court against the criminal. If we arrested a criminal, for which you or your family member was a victim, you could see first hand how our court system works. It would be really interesting to sit down with you after all that.
I don’t mean to single you out but have you really lived in a poor and dangerous area of the United States? You and The Raven seem to be the most liberal on this thread and I think both of you mean well and really want the best for people, but to be completely honest sometimes reading your posts it seems like you think you have all the answers but I am not sure you have all the life experience for some the complex topics being discussed. I know my answers are sometimes very different than yours. I think that may be because my life experiences are different than yours.

 

[Tank]

All of this is very interesting conversation(other than the name calling) and views on a most difficult problem. Obviously something has to change. While I'm not an avid gun enthusiast I do believe that civilians have a right to defend themselves in their homes and on their property. But as Cobra mentioned, the best self defense weapon in the home is a shotgun. It's not an AR 15. I just see no rational reason for a civilian to own an assault rifle.

 

[cobrajet]

All of this is very interesting conversation(other than the name calling) and views on a most difficult problem. Obviously something has to change. While I'm not an avid gun enthusiast I do believe that civilians have a right to defend themselves in their homes and on their property. But as Cobra mentioned, the best self defense weapon in the home is a shotgun. It's not an AR 15. I just see no rational reason for a civilian to own an assault rifle.

I kinda feel the same way but an AR15 is not all that much different than a semi automatic hunting rifle and you can get a semi automatic hunting rifle in way more lethal calibers than an AR15. You could limit a magazine to a certain amount of rounds but people would still get the larger capacity ones on the black market or tape a few magazines together for quick reloading. We could try banning AR15’s, AK47’s, and weapons like this but I believe we have to do more. Kids in the county used to bring their hunting rifles into school in the 70’s and 80’s after they went hunting in the morning and there was never any school shootings. Something has changed, seriously something has really changed. If we eliminated all these assault weapons overnight, I really believe it would not change much. I think these kids have changed. Schools have really taken bullying and unfair treatment seriously and these schools have to be easier to attend nowadays from when I went to school. Bullying was out of control in my day. Kids were just as angry back then, why all of a sudden now do we have the shootings? In fact, back in my day, parents never locked up their guns. There were no gun safes and gun locks back then. We even carried pocket knives and no one ever said anything. Try getting caught nowadays with a knife in school and see what happens. Something more seems to be going on here.
I also noticed something interesting to me, it seems like white kids are shooting white kids in white or Caucasian schools. I am not noticing major mass school shootings in high crime inner city schools. I hate to say that because I don’t want to jinx that, and it may be only a matter of time that may start happening soon. I just wonder if there is a reason for this, because my small brain can’t explain any of it. I have a very hard time trying to wrap my head around what would possess a young person or any person wanting to kill many other young people or any mass shooting of people anywhere. Even when there are warning signs, people just don’t expect this kind of thing to happen. I guess we probably really need to get on the ball, with these warning signs. However, we are going to have a lot of fighting from both sides of the fence if we start trying to take rights away from people we are afraid of. It seems to me we better start talking logically and keep an open mind on this subject, and we will need to talk a lot about mental health.