Finally Sensible Talk about Gun Safety From Newtown

[OHCHUTE 0]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/a-month-after-massacre-newtown-considers-what-to-do-with-conn-school-where-gunman-killed-26/2013/01/13/f4d10aaa-5dde-11e2-8acb-ab5cb77e95c8_story.html


"They include requiring gun owners to lock up their weapons in their homes if the guns could be accessed by mentally ill or dangerous people, and boosting federal grants for school security reviews.

Pozner’s family also is suggesting a new law requiring people to notify police within 24 hours if they know about an imminent threat of harm or death made by a person who has access to guns or explosive devices. Breaking the law would be a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail."

[davjohns 1]

I didn't follow the link; only read what you wrote. I think those are common sense things that shouldn't need to be law, but I could certainly support them. Sadly, I think they are only enforceable after something bad happens in the first case, and hardly at all in the second.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[blueblur 0]

My only question about the proposals listed there is the 24-hr notification of nutters punishable by jail time... how are they going to prove that someone did or did not know in order to send someone to jail for failing to notify authorities? And then the onus is on the person to be able to identify/diagnose nutters and their intent to do harm, someone who is not a trained psych evaluator...

In every man's life he will be allotted one good woman and one good dog. That's all you get, so appreciate them while the time you have with them lasts.

- RiggerLee

[regulator 0]

That would be difficult to prove...unless there was a 3rd party witness that could corroborate the story.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

My only question about the proposals listed there is the 24-hr notification of nutters punishable by jail time... how are they going to prove that someone did or did not know in order to send someone to jail for failing to notify authorities? And then the onus is on the person to be able to identify/diagnose nutters and their intent to do harm, someone who is not a trained psych evaluator...

This is called the, "How do we create an incentive to not cooperate with an investigation?"

Now, there are "mandated reporters" by law who must report things such as suspected child abuse (doctors, teachers). In exchange for being mandated reporters they also have immunity for making a report that doesn't turn up as justified.

Now we can add all you sidewalk shrinks out there. We see people here (even kallend) bemoaning the state of education in this country - even the knowledge of math that one would think that an engineering student would have.

Yet we want these people to report people. To the government. J. Edgar Hoover applauds the genius of this.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[davjohns 1]

I read the writing as more strict than just thinking they are crazy. I presumed the locking up of the weapons applied to someone adjudicated mentally ill. The one about reporting threats says specifically that a threat has to be made. That's not subjective.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[lawrocket 3]

I'm worried, Dave. I heard an outtake from Bloomberg’s talk at John’s Hopkins. He said something to the effect of this is not a Constitutional issue but an issue of political willpower.

Edited to add the quote: ""This not a constitutional question,'' he said. "This is a question of courage… There is no debate here. It's common sense.''

That’s a scary, scary statement.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[OHCHUTE 0]

It seems the focus is on Ms. Lanza for making guns available to her son who she knew had mental problems. Of course I wasn't there, the boy could have held a knife to his mom demanding she open the safe etc. In any event, so much as I respect Ms. Lanza's right to own guns and keep them in her house, it might have not been the right thing to do knowing the son had mental problems.

It would be almost impossible to legislate against people making the wrong choices about keeping or handling guns no matter any law or safe gun handling directive.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Quote

My only question about the proposals listed there is the 24-hr notification of nutters punishable by jail time... how are they going to prove that someone did or did not know in order to send someone to jail for failing to notify authorities? And then the onus is on the person to be able to identify/diagnose nutters and their intent to do harm, someone who is not a trained psych evaluator...

This is called the, "How do we create an incentive to not cooperate with an investigation?"

Now, there are "mandated reporters" by law who must report things such as suspected child abuse (doctors, teachers). In exchange for being mandated reporters they also have immunity for making a report that doesn't turn up as justified.

I'm a mandated reporter. I have to exercise that at least every few months. Most of the time there is not a serious investigation and nothing is done. Creating a whole host of more mandated reporters isn't going to do much without mandated follow-ups. What will those follow-ups be? How will it be enforced?

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Creating a whole host of more mandated reporters isn't going to do much without mandated follow-ups. What will those follow-ups be? How will it be enforced

By a whole new federally funded system, likely under the Department of Homeland Security. Perhaps there will even be provisions allowing for warrantless searches and the like.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

Creating a whole host of more mandated reporters isn't going to do much without mandated follow-ups. What will those follow-ups be? How will it be enforced

By a whole new federally funded system, likely under the Department of Homeland Security. Perhaps there will even be provisions allowing for warrantless searches and the like.

Millions are submitting to warrentless searches at the airport each day so it's only natural home owners will allow swat teams go through their belongs at home looking for AR's. With Bloomie and his wall street buddies who own this country anyway, what can you expect that they'll want to protect their empire as best they can.

The only people that will put up any resistance are those pesky patriots who don't believe in tyrants. People to the likes of Ben Franklin,George Washington, Madison, Adams, Jefferson, who thought not only about themselves but others welfare in launching and waging a revolution against a tyrant who at the time of the launch of the revolution were going through people pockets, homes, businesses etc.