Junior Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 What I'm getting at is that the discussion in this country is not focusing on the problem. You are falling into it also. A gun was used to commit this horrible act. People can be violent with guns. So, your thought process is that any promotion of anything shooting or with a gun is promoting violence and that just simply isn't the case. If I take my shot gun out and shoot skeet in my back yard, there is absolutely NOTHING violent about that. years ago there was a chain saw massacre in Texas. So, does that mean that if I go cut down a dead tree in my back yard I'm being violent because I'm using a chain saw? People have been killed with a chain saw after all. The gun, used as intended, kills. The chainsaw, used as intended, chops down trees. There is a substantial difference there. I agree that people can be non-violent with guns. The issue in the country, however, is that it is so easy to obtain guns and ammunition (this woman in Newtown had how many for her son to grab and use?) that committing violent acts with them becomes much simpler. You keep bringing up skeet shooting, but how many people shoot skeet with a Bushmaster .223 assault rifle? Is that level of firearm necessary to have a nice day at the shooting range blowing up some skeet? People say that the criminals will still get guns. And they are right to an extent, drug dealers and thugs will always find a way to get a gun. However, these mass murders are being committed by people legally obtaining these weapons and ammo. Honestly, the sale of Sudafed is more regulated than the sale of ammunition. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 But, still no talk about the motivation and mental capacity behind the person committing the violence. Like I said. Make whatever laws you want, the violence isn't going to stop until the motivation behind them and mental capacity of the people committing the crime is addressed. This is like you working on your car thinking you need to change the battery when it is actually out of gas. Fine...change the battery but it's still not going to run. You are going into the emotional thought process behind this. It's the "easy" solution. Nobody wants to address the real problem. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 But, still no talk about the motivation and mental capacity behind the person committing the violence. Like I said. Make whatever laws you want, the violence isn't going to stop until the motivation behind them and mental capacity of the people committing the crime is addressed. Mental health problems must be addressed. I'm not sure where we'll find the money to address them . . . but it needs to happen. That said, that doesn't excuse inaction in other areas like trying to keep firearms out of the hands of crazy people. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I have not heard any proposals that make me believe they will keep guns out of the hands of crazy people. Can you explain some that will? Link to comment
Junior Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 But, still no talk about the motivation and mental capacity behind the person committing the violence. Like I said. Make whatever laws you want, the violence isn't going to stop until the motivation behind them and mental capacity of the people committing the crime is addressed. This is like you working on your car thinking you need to change the battery when it is actually out of gas. Fine...change the battery but it's still not going to run. You are going into the emotional thought process behind this. It's the "easy" solution. Nobody wants to address the real problem. Look at the homicide rates in the US versus the rest of the first world. We are massively higher than they. Ask yourself why? Is there a difference in how we handle mental illness? There certainly is to the extent that we are also the only country in the first world that doesn't have universal health care. But what other differences are there? Ease of access to guns has to be considered a key. I've said that many times. I'm more than willing to address mental health, and it will take government spending on universal health care and medical research that republicans don't want. They already want to slash the NIH budget. Just like putting armed guards in schools. They want to slash education spending, but want to pay to put an armed cop in every school in America? And where was this concern about mental health 2 months ago? It only became an issue when people started talking gun control. Now you are using it as an issue to try and distract people from talking about how I can get a semi-automatic rifle and 5000 rounds of ammo... and I can get it all in a week. Seriously, someone tell me how it makes sense that I am regulated more on how much Sudafed I buy than how many rounds of bullets Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Again, what laws that are being proposed would have kept a gun out of the hands of the person who shot up kids in Newtown? From what I have read, Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws in the country and the guns were all purchased legally. If they are purchased legally, I'm sure there were back ground checks ran on the mother before she was allowed to purchase the gun. Even if there wasn't, was there anything in her past that would have thrown up red flags? I haven't heard of any. What good would have restricting ammunition done? From what I have heard, these things are usually pre planned. Meaning, let's say restrictions are put in place to delay some how purchasing of ammunition. Someone like this would just wait for them to come in the mail. You and I weren't having this conversation two months ago. Why? I have had these thoughts about mental health for years. Link to comment
Junior Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Again, what laws that are being proposed would have kept a gun out of the hands of the person who shot up kids in Newtown? From what I have read, Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws in the country and the guns were all purchased legally. If they are purchased legally, I'm sure there were back ground checks ran on the mother before she was allowed to purchase the gun. Even if there wasn't, was there anything in her past that would have thrown up red flags? I haven't heard of any. What good would have restricting ammunition done? From what I have heard, these things are usually pre planned. Meaning, let's say restrictions are put in place to delay some how purchasing of ammunition. Someone like this would just wait for them to come in the mail. You and I weren't having this conversation two months ago. Why? I have had these thoughts about mental health for years. I can't speak intelligently to Connecticut's gun laws, but I would certainly argue that there is no need for anyone to have a Bushmaster .223 semi-automatic assault rifle (among many other guns). And the fact that they were purchased legally is exactly the point. They shouldn't be legal! The point on restricting ammunition sales is that I can go buy several hundred rounds today and no one bats an eye. If I go buy 3 boxes of Sudafed, the DEA will investigate me. Don't you think someone buying 500 rounds of ammo is worthy of a look? Yes, I can wait another month to go buy more Sudafed as well and stockpile it, but the government still tries to restrict the bulk purchase of that. Here is the current regulation on Sudafed: Required a retrievable record of all purchases, identifying the name and address of each party, to be kept for two years Required verification of proof of identity of all purchasers Required protection and disclosure methods in the collection of personal information Required reports to the Attorney General of any suspicious payments or disappearances of the regulated products Required training of employees with regard to the requirements of the CMEA. Retailers must self-certify as to training and compliance. The non-liquid dose form of regulated products may only be sold in unit dose blister packs Regulated products must be stored behind the counter or in a locked cabinet in such a way as to restrict public access Sales limits (per customer):Daily sales limit—must not exceed 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine base without regard to the number of transactions 30-day (not monthly) sales limit—must not exceed 7.5 grams of pseudoephedrine base if sold by mail order or "mobile retail vendor" 30-day purchase limit—must not exceed 9 grams of pseudoephedrine base. (A misdemeanor possession offense under 21 U.S.C. § 844a for the person who buys it.) The regulation on bullets: Nothing that I'm aware of. Not even an ID. No one thing is a magic bullet (no pun intended) on fixing the problem. It is going to take a combination of these actions to achieve meaningful change. The problem is that people like you seem to think that if one specific course of action isn't the cure all, we might as well not do anything. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 And, yet...like you implied, I could just wait over a two month period and buy one box of bullets at a time. As for the Bushmaster, I can agree with that. I honestly don't understand why someone would want one even though I am a gun owner and enjoy using them. BUT, say you outlaw the Bushmaster, are you saying I can't take a gun like what I use for hunting and do one hell of a lot of damage is a school? Heck, how about if I take my two shot guns, saw off the barrels. I can walk into any school and I bet you 8-10 people could be dead before anyone can do anything about it. Link to comment
Junior Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 http://peninsulaclarion.com/opinion/letters/2013-01-14/a-red-herring-in-the-gun-control-debate The Second Amendment was written at a time when the most powerful weapon a person could carry was a muzzle loading, smooth bore, flintlock long gun. Only an expert could fire it as many as four times a minute, and not for very long. Modern semiautomatic and fully automatic weapons are able to fire four to nine times a second. They may be fitted with magazines carrying one hundred or more cartridges available for purchase over the internet. No questions are asked beyond, “Credit card number?” That is a situation the civilized world legitimately calls “insane.” Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I have not heard any proposals that make me believe they will keep guns out of the hands of crazy people. Can you explain some that will? Background checks for all gun sales would be a good start. At the very least it would weed out some crazy people who have felony convictions. Link to comment
Junior Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I have not heard any proposals that make me believe they will keep guns out of the hands of crazy people. Can you explain some that will? Background checks for all gun sales would be a good start. At the very least it would weed out some crazy people who have felony convictions. Yea, but it isn't going to stop all gun violence, so why bother. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Nice smart ass comment when we are trying to have conversation about it. Carl... I agree with keeping guns out of felons hands. However, if people think that is going to stop stuff like Newtown they are mistaken. When was the last time one of these psychos was a felon? Link to comment
AR Husker Fan Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Jon Stewart and Common Sense on Gun Control 1 Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I should have my permit to purchase my AR-15 here in Nazi Jersey in about a month hopefully... Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I agree with keeping guns out of felons hands. However, if people think that is going to stop stuff like Newtown they are mistaken. No one has said that it's possible (or likely) to totally stop gun homicides. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't aim for (pun unintended) reduction. When was the last time one of these psychos was a felon? People are killed with guns outside of mass shootings. A 2008 study out of Chicago showed that 91 percent of homicide offenders had been arrested prior to committing the offense. Outside of mass shootings it appears that murderers (admittedly using the words loosely interchangeably) are very likely to have criminal records. As far as I can tell it's not broken down by severity. Regardless, it seems quite relevant. http://www.chicagojustice.org/blog/reporting-as-the-201ccarnage-and-mayhem201d/2008_Murder_Analysis_in_Chicago_CPD.pdf Link to comment
Recommended Posts