Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 49 (9181 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,287 Year: 5,544/9,624 Month: 569/323 Week: 66/143 Day: 9/19 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   How can we regulate guns ... ?
Member (Idle past 2225 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 6 of 955 (686355)
12-31-2012 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by RAZD
12-31-2012 2:04 PM

Re: Regulation Proposal #1
How about not?
Before you start stacking rule upon regulation on honest gun owners, figure out why all the already-extensive rules and regulations that exist in places like Chicago, Washington DC, and New York City aren't working.
You know the definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 12-31-2012 2:04 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by RAZD, posted 12-31-2012 2:15 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 187 by DBlevins, posted 01-04-2013 2:09 PM Coyote has not replied

Member (Idle past 2225 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 13 of 955 (686367)
12-31-2012 2:52 PM

Pass a law that murder using a gun merits life in prison without the possibility of parole.
(Wait! Didn't they already do that?)

Replies to this message:
 Message 712 by NoNukes, posted 01-18-2013 1:03 PM Coyote has not replied

Member (Idle past 2225 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 15 of 955 (686373)
12-31-2012 3:11 PM

Following the Newtown massacre there has been an outcry from the left for more and tougher gun laws. Sen. Dianne Feinstein has proposed another assault weapons ban with more teeth than the previous ban. Exactly what are consequences of tough gun laws? Let us construct a hypothetical place with some strict gun laws:
Let’s regulate the sale, possession and use of firearms.
Let’s regulate ammunition.
Let’s insist that those possessing firearms have a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card.
Let’s ban automatic firearms, short-barreled shotguns and short-barreled rifles.
Let’s ban assault weapons.
Let’s ban magazines that can hold more than 10 or 12 rounds of ammunition.
Let’s deny gun ownership to those who have been convicted of a felony or an act of domestic violence, are the subject of an order of protection, have been convicted of assault or battery or been a patient in a mental institution within the last five years, have been adjudicated as a mental defective, or are illegal immigrants.
For want of a better name, let’s call a place with gun laws like this--Chicago.
What America would look like with strict gun laws - Flopping Aces

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by onifre, posted 12-31-2012 3:45 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 26 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-01-2013 12:11 AM Coyote has not replied

Member (Idle past 2225 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 24 of 955 (686398)
12-31-2012 9:12 PM

Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control
Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control
After a school massacre, the U.K. banned handguns in 1998. A decade later, handgun crime had doubled.
Americans are determined that massacres such as happened in Newtown, Conn., never happen again. But how? Many advocate more effective treatment of mentally-ill people or armed protection in so-called gun-free zones. Many others demand stricter control of firearms.
We aren't alone in facing this problem. Great Britain and Australia, for example, suffered mass shootings in the 1980s and 1990s. Both countries had very stringent gun laws when they occurred. Nevertheless, both decided that even stricter control of guns was the answer. Their experiences can be instructive.
What to conclude? Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven't made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres. The two major countries held up as models for the U.S. don't provide much evidence that strict gun laws will solve our problems.
Joyce Lee Malcolm: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control - WSJ
From the Wall Street Journal.

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by ramoss, posted 12-31-2012 11:34 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 27 by RAZD, posted 01-01-2013 8:40 AM Coyote has not replied

Member (Idle past 2225 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 72 of 955 (686477)
01-01-2013 10:51 PM

A rant in reaction to the typical feel-good solutions
Two statistics from the web:
Despite making up only 15 percent of America’s child population, black children accounted for 45 percent of the gun fatalities in 2009 and 2010...
59% of all homicides in 2001 in Los Angeles and
53% in Chicago were gang related, there was a total of 698 gang related homicides in those two cities combined whereas 130 other cities with population of at least 100,000 with gang problems reported having a total of 637 homicides between them
As usual, those on the left get gung ho every time there is a mass shooting of some kind and propose all sorts of "remedies."
And as usual, most of those remedies were either already in place, or would not have prevented the mass shooting. But, also as usual, enacting some feel-good "solutions" seems to be more important than figuring out what the real problem is and working to solve it. Feeling good is often easier than real-world solutions, but perhaps a part of the problem can be attributed to a general gun phobia on the part of leftists. Same as nuclear power--its the only thing that can really solve the energy problems we face, but because of their personal phobias, lefties just can't support nuclear power.
So the primary problem is not a few mass-killings by nut-cases, but in larger part is a Balkanism/tribalism that is developing in many inner cities for socio-economic and other related reasons.
But, in typical leftie fashion, their approach to the problem would be to require registration of all firearms and their owners, a "solution" affecting only honest and law-abiding citizens, but not affecting those who make up the majority of the actual problem! Way to go lefties!
So the bottom line--why push feel-good rules after each of these mass killings, rules which won't address the larger problem which centers more around gangs, drugs, inner-cities and their tribal cultures and the like, than it does random nut-cases and random one-of-a-kind homicides.
If you want to prevent these random mass shootings, there should be enough information out there to begin profiling those most likely to engage in them. Certainly the FBI has a good profiling department and presumably has some good ideas of the characteristics and traits to be watching for. Intervention with a troubled teen would be a far better solution than imposing loads of restrictions on law-abiding citizens. It also has the additional benefit that it might actually work!
Also, take suicides out of this discussion. Someone who is determined to commit suicide is a different situation entirely. They are not killed by guns, they kill themselves using guns. They'll use whatever they can get. If legal means are not available, and they generally aren't, and drugs are not available, then guns become more likely to be used. And so it goes, down to jumping off bridges and finding a length of rope. This is an entirely different problem with entirely different solutions.
(My member rating was getting too high anyway.)

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Tangle, posted 01-02-2013 3:48 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied
 Message 74 by Heathen, posted 01-02-2013 7:05 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 161 by Jon, posted 01-02-2013 11:57 PM Coyote has not replied

Member (Idle past 2225 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 159 of 955 (686689)
01-02-2013 8:32 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Rahvin
01-02-2013 7:26 PM

Re: My Ideas for Regulation
The same people who clamor on about gun rights are the same people that were calling for the occupy protestors to be shot and calling them dirty scumbags.
Funny, isn't it?
There are nutcases on every side.
Let's not forget this recent gem:
Des Moines Register publishes gun-ban column advocating deadly violence against NRA, GOP leaders
Donald Kaul retired earlier this year. Now he has decided to return to writing occasional opinion columns for The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn. brought out all his ugliness.
In a column that appeared after the shooting with the headline "Kaul: Nation needs a new agenda on guns," he proposed a new liberal agenda: repeal the Second Amendment, declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal, and well, make violent threats to Republican leaders and NRA members. The Des Moines Register published this junk on December 29.
"I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control," he wrote. Is that a threatening James Byrd reference? "And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures," he continued.
Des Moines Register publishes gun-ban column advocating deadly violence against NRA, GOP leaders | Fox News
A real sweetie, eh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Rahvin, posted 01-02-2013 7:26 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Panda, posted 01-03-2013 5:23 AM Coyote has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024