More mass shootings

[yoink 321]

Hooknswoop

Quote

You must live in a rough neighborhood to be so fearful.

You must be a really bad, paranoid, and fearful skydiver to have a Cypres in your rig.

Derek V

No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it any more likely that I'm going to get depressed and go and kill a load of students with my Cypres.

[wmw999 2,447]

There is no law whatsoever that will magically fix all gun problems without inconveniencing anyone but criminals, and preventing all first-time criminals from considering using a gun.

There cannot be a sensible discussion with people who set that as the bar, any more than there cannot be a sensible discussion with people who think all guns should be immediately banned and turned in.

What the (often noisy) people at those poles fail to see is that in generating the most noise with the least content, they're preventing any discussion that might actually determine what are the goals (reduce loss of life? reduce loss of innocent life? reduce domestic violence? etc) that can be addressed, whether there's any point beyond the symbolic to addressing them (reducing the gun-related deaths of Polish ancestry people in Idaho).

By symbolic I don't mean those people don't matter. What I do mean is that they don't generally matter more. If they did, we wouldn't be sending our beautiful young men and women overseas to fight and die in a fight that wasn't really ours to begin with.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Hence my suggested law that IS enforceable, but you won't consider because you don't want to give up your right to be able to shoot in a school.

Quote

No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it any more likely that I'm going to get depressed and go and kill a load of students with my Cypres.

And no matter how many times you say I want the "right to be able to shoot in a school", doesn't make it any more true.

Derek V

[rifleman 70]

I live in the UK, and currently own 3 firearms - a pump action Remington 870 (limited to 3 rounds), a Remington 700 chambered for .308 and a Beretta ARX160 (semi-auto only and chambered for .22LR). I use all of them on my local range and for hunting (food, not trophy). I've had to submit to a full criminal record check, had police officers visit my home and inspect both my gun and ammunition safes and any changes to the guns I hold have to be notified to the police. It's not a massive inconvenience, usually just a phone call to the local firearms officer. I have permission to hunt rabbit and pigeon on the local estates, I occasionally travel to Scotland to hunt deer and I enjoy range time with all three weapons.

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[wmw999 2,447]

Do you want to be able to participate in protecting children in a school?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[yoink 321]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Hence my suggested law that IS enforceable, but you won't consider because you don't want to give up your right to be able to shoot in a school.

***No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it any more likely that I'm going to get depressed and go and kill a load of students with my Cypres.

And no matter how many times you say I want the "right to be able to shoot in a school", doesn't make it any more true.

Derek V

You won't accept any restrictions on where you can shoot. Therefore it is true.

I could add malls, cinemas, supermarkets and whatever to it.



Let's put it this way - would you accept a revision to my idea that stops guns from being fired in schools?
All guns must be fitted with an auto-off system which prevents them firing in those locations?

[kallend 2,027]

Guns don't start out in the hands of criminals because criminals can't legally buy guns. Just about every "illegal" gun was once transferred from the mythical "law abiding gun owner" to a criminal by one of several means, many of which can be shut down.

And the mental illness situation is a glaring problem that has been exacerbated by the gun lobby's efforts.

The ignorance of those blaming the FL shooter's actions on mental illness and then calling for the death penalty is just astounding.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,027]

yoink

***

Quote

You must live in a rough neighborhood to be so fearful.

You must be a really bad, paranoid, and fearful skydiver to have a Cypres in your rig.

Derek V

No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it any more likely that I'm going to get depressed and go and kill a load of students with my Cypres.

I can't recall of a single case of mass murder being committed with a CYPRES. Maybe Derek can inform us.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I live in the UK, and currently own 3 firearms - a pump action Remington 870 (limited to 3 rounds), a Remington 700 chambered for .308 and a Beretta ARX160 (semi-auto only and chambered for .22LR). I use all of them on my local range and for hunting (food, not trophy). I've had to submit to a full criminal record check, had police officers visit my home and inspect both my gun and ammunition safes and any changes to the guns I hold have to be notified to the police. It's not a massive inconvenience, usually just a phone call to the local firearms officer. I have permission to hunt rabbit and pigeon on the local estates, I occasionally travel to Scotland to hunt deer and I enjoy range time with all three weapons.

And which of these laws/procedures(?) would prevent someone from using their firearms(s) to commit murder?

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Do you want to be able to participate in protecting children in a school?

I would need more details, but sure.

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Let's put it this way - would you accept a revision to my idea that stops guns from being fired in schools?
All guns must be fitted with an auto-off system which prevents them firing in those locations?

If you could ensure that 100% of the guns in the US were outfitted with this technology and couldn't be bypassed, I would be all for it. But that just isn't possible.

Derek V

[DanG 1]

Quote

You are not going to prosecute anyone with only the word of a criminal that is getting a reduced sentence in exchange. You keep missing my point. You have to be able to prove they sold the firearm. Innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not missing the point. You are being intentionally obtuse. The criminal fingering the seller would not be the only evidence used to convict. It would start the investigation. Would they always be able to find additional evidence? Of course not. But they would sometimes, and in those cases you have (gasp) enforcement of your unenforceable rule.

Note: my stupid iPad won't let me paste in the rest of your post, so I'll paraphrase.

You want to ban bump stocks. Great. But that takes away a freedom that other people currently enjoy, so we can't do that. Banning bump stocks takes away exactly the same amount of freedom as banning 100 round drums. Why are you in favor of one but not the other? I suspect it is because you don't own a bump stock. No more, no less.

You want to fund the background check system and improve military reporting. Super, I completely agree. However, when you have transfers that aren't subject to the background check system, it is not a complete solution.

- Dan G

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I can't recall of a single case of mass murder being committed with a CYPRES. Maybe Derek can inform us.

I can't recall a single instance of someone using an AAD to defend themselves from an attacker. Maybe John can inform us.

This is really getting silly. Can we please stop this?

Derek V

[BIGUN 1,316]

As a former soldier (with a kid in school that has campus police - with arrest authority and which trains with the local police on active shooter scenarios) am conflicted about the knee-jerk reaction to a solution that calls for more additions to the ~1,500 federal and state gun laws (depending on state) in place.

Some thoughts:

1. Perhaps I've had my fill of assault rifles and feel no need to own one - but, I will not determine who can own one. There are many types of hunting rifles more powerful than the AR-15, so to me - banning assault looking weapons is silly. If you did that - they would just pick up the next weapon available.

2. If I sell a gun - they have to sign a bill of sale... cause I don't know three owners down the line's intentions. Therefore, I have no problem with a formal system of transference not unlike that of an automobile.

3. Training - the course for those who don't have any training is a bit of a joke (2 days). Extend the training & require annual re-quals with a minimum of marksman.

4. There are some states that allow one with a DD-214 in the past 20 years to waive the two day course. Everyone has to take the extended course prior to receiving a CCP. I seriously know AF & Navy folks that saw a weapon in basic with annual re-quals and that was about it.

5. Even uniform unarmed patrol in schools has served as a deterrence.

6. Metal detectors + campus security = http://bigthink.com/paul-ratner/theres-one-way-to-stop-school-shootings-without-taking-away-anyones-guns

7. There's plenty of police officers who work armed security jobs for extra money - put them in the queue first for those jobs (and they've been trained on active shooter, ALERRRT, etc.). Give certified officers an exemption to carry weapons on school grounds as campus police (security as unarmed/police as armed). https://www.campussafetymagazine.com/university/concealed-carry-policy-campus-carry-campus-police-public-safety/

But, of course, I live in a state where: http://www.newson6.com/story/31124844/okay-public-schools-now-allowing-staff-to-carry-guns-on-campus

Bottom line: this is not a left or right issue. We (most) all have kids/nieces/nephews. We should require our politicians work to find a middle ground. It can be done and without infringing on the 2nd amendment.

EDIT: Add URL

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[yoink 321]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Let's put it this way - would you accept a revision to my idea that stops guns from being fired in schools?
All guns must be fitted with an auto-off system which prevents them firing in those locations?

If you could ensure that 100% of the guns in the US were outfitted with this technology and couldn't be bypassed, I would be all for it. But that just isn't possible.

Derek V

Precisely.

As nothing can ever be 100% certain all of this discussion is pointless.

Your stance is 'unless it's instantly and 100% perfect I'm not willing to accept any change'.
Therefore you're just the noise Wendy was talking about.

[wmw999 2,447]

Well, if your idea of protecting children in school includes weapons and firing, then you do want to be able to fire guns in a school. You just think that you can choose when (and you're undoubtedly right).

Unfortunately, there are at least 50,000,000 other people who feel the same way. Estimate of gun-owning households at 42%, assuming only one gun-owner per household. Not necessarily a good assumption, but it underestimates the number of people, rather than overestimating, which is better from a truth point of view.

What are the chances that all of those 50,000,000 people are right? And that they're right that their violent cousin-in-law isn't ever ever ever going to get their hands on one of their guns?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I'm not missing, the point. You are being intentionally obtuse. The criminal fingering the seller would not be the only evidence used to convict. It would start the investigation. Would they always be able to find additional evidence, of course not. But they would sometimes, and in those cases you have (gasp) enforcement of your unenforceable rule.

What other evidence?

Quote

it is not a complete solution.

No, it isn't. The only complete solution is to confiscate all firearms and ban the sell or possession of them.

You accused me of; "Also, thanks for proving what I suspected all along. You aren't interested in making any changes at all."

Now you are moving the goalposts. I offered changes I am for and now you complain that it "it is not a complete solution."

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Precisely.

As nothing can ever be 100% certain all of this discussion is pointless.

Your stance is 'unless it's instantly and 100% perfect I'm not willing to accept any change'.
Therefore you're just the noise Wendy was talking about.

No, because criminals are not going to install your GPS device. Or they will remove them.

See above for some changes I am for. My stance is NOT, "'unless it's instantly and 100% perfect I'm not willing to accept any change'. "

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Well, if your idea of protecting children in school includes weapons and firing, then you do want to be able to fire guns in a school. You just think that you can choose when (and you're undoubtedly right).

Unfortunately, there are at least 50,000,000 other people who feel the same way. Estimate of gun-owning households at 42%, assuming only one gun-owner per household. Not necessarily a good assumption, but it underestimates the number of people, rather than overestimating, which is better from a truth point of view.

What are the chances that all of those 50,000,000 people are right? And that they're right that their violent cousin-in-law isn't ever ever ever going to get their hands on one of their guns?

I don't have a solution. I know that gun control, short of all guns going away, except military and police, won't make much difference.

Derek V

[DanG 1]

Quote

what other evidence?

Holy shit, man. C'mon. That's like saying the murder laws are unenforceable because you can't convict someone based only on the testimony of a single co-conspirator. No, you can't, you have to find other evidence. What other evidence? That's your question. There are a million answers, I'm not going to list them. Here's one: a third party witness. "Did you see person A hand person B this weapon?" "Yes." (Gasp) Enforcement!

I'm not moving the goalposts, I'm pointing out a problem with your proposed solution. I was wrong to say that you refuse to accept any changes, sorry. I'm glad you support strengthening the background check system. I'm simply pointing out that a better solution would be to strengthen it while also closing up some of the holes.

- Dan G

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Holy shit, man. C'mon. That's like saying the murder laws are unenforceable because you can't convict someone based only on the testimony of a single co-conspirator. No, you can't, you have to find other evidence. What other evidence? That's your question. There are a million answers, I'm not going to list them. Here's one: a third party witness. "Did you see person A hand person B this weapon?" "Yes." (Gasp) Enforcement!

You keep missing my point. Without a gun registry that proves who bought what guns, you are not going to convict anyone. I have several firearms without serial numbers, legally.

Quote

I'm simply pointing out that a better solution would be to strengthen it while also closing up some of the holes.

No worries. And I agree that things should be and could be better.

More police in higher crime areas. I know that taxes would have to go up to pay for it, but I would vote yes for that. More money for mental health. Free health insurance. I am for these things and they would help.

Derek V

[kallend 2,027]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Well, if your idea of protecting children in school includes weapons and firing, then you do want to be able to fire guns in a school. You just think that you can choose when (and you're undoubtedly right).

Unfortunately, there are at least 50,000,000 other people who feel the same way. Estimate of gun-owning households at 42%, assuming only one gun-owner per household. Not necessarily a good assumption, but it underestimates the number of people, rather than overestimating, which is better from a truth point of view.

What are the chances that all of those 50,000,000 people are right? And that they're right that their violent cousin-in-law isn't ever ever ever going to get their hands on one of their guns?

I don't have a solution. I know that gun control, short of all guns going away, except military and police, won't make much difference.

Derek V

It did in other nations. The USA is the BIG outlier in gun homicides.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DJL 235]

DanG

Quote

You are not going to prosecute anyone with only the word of a criminal that is getting a reduced sentence in exchange. You keep missing my point. You have to be able to prove they sold the firearm. Innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not missing the point. You are being intentionally obtuse. The criminal fingering the seller would not be the only evidence used to convict. It would start the investigation. Would they always be able to find additional evidence? Of course not. But they would sometimes, and in those cases you have (gasp) enforcement of your unenforceable rule.

Note: my stupid iPad won't let me paste in the rest of your post, so I'll paraphrase.

You want to ban bump stocks. Great. But that takes away a freedom that other people currently enjoy, so we can't do that. Banning bump stocks takes away exactly the same amount of freedom as banning 100 round drums. Why are you in favor of one but not the other? I suspect it is because you don't own a bump stock. No more, no less.

You want to fund the background check system and improve military reporting. Super, I completely agree. However, when you have transfers that aren't subject to the background check system, it is not a complete solution.

In addition, just the fact that a weapon has gone missing needs to be addressed with penalties. If "Law Abiding Citizens" are so "Law Abiding" then there shouldn't be a problem. In continuation of the poster above from the UK I envision a program that works much like the blueprint of a Pharmacy or the DMV, the individual is responsible for procuring the correct training and paperwork in order to purchase the weapon only from a FFL, no person to person sales, must go through the FFL. This requires that person to be a citizen in good standing with legal requirements. The gun must be sold with a trigger lock and the person must own a gun safe. The firearms are subject to inspection by law enforcement to ensure they are there. Any weapons that go missing much be reported or else endure a penalty. Unreported lost weapons used in a crime result in a higher penalty to include the loss of a firearms license.

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

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Unreported lost weapons used in a crime result in a higher penalty to include the loss of a firearms license.

How are you going to prove that Glock was mine? There are no records. This is my point about the universal background check being required. Unless you have a database that shows who owns what firearms, you cannot prove that firearm ever belonged to me (or whomever).

Derek V

[DJL 235]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Unreported lost weapons used in a crime result in a higher penalty to include the loss of a firearms license.

How are you going to prove that Glock was mine? There are no records. This is my point about the universal background check being required. Unless you have a database that shows who owns what firearms, you cannot prove that firearm ever belonged to me (or whomever).

Derek V

All new guns must be registered, any sale of an unregistered gun must go through an FFL to become registered, all existing unregistered guns handled by an FFL (cleaning, inspection, appraisal) must become registered, any guns inspected in the course of a police interaction recorded and thereafter registered.

CREATE THE DAMN DATABASE. Seriously, not that hard. I have a database of every nut and bolt and sale that occurs within my company with a simple bar code scanner. If you have the unregistered weapon then ownership starts with you as owner number 1.

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