BigRedBuster Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 A higher bar for ownership that reduces the level of gun ownership and the number of guns in circulation. Federally sponsored research from the CDC to advise policy. Government sponsored buyback programs to encourage a reduction of guns in circulation. Keep rights but improve the situation. Promote more anti-gun education (which is no more a threat to the responsible gun owner than anti-alcohol and anti-smoking initiatives are to those who choose it anyway, or use them responsibly). Fully automatic AK47s are of course not allowed already and while we can always have a conversation about what else should or shouldn't be legal, it doesn't take high capacity clips to commit gun violence -- whether it's suicide, inappropriate nonlethal use (i.e, threats), lethal crime, or mass shootings. *** edit *** so, I guess I may be wrong about fully automatic AK47s are of course not allowed. Wouldn't the RED need to come before anything else? If not, you're just going to end up with a bunch of knee jerk legislation that probably won't do squat. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Yes. The problem is, the CDC is barred from it. Why? The NRA didn't like it. And Congress defunded it until they complied. “The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.” http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence That's our NRA. Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 zoogs pretty much hit the nail on the head, and saunders you're dreaming if you don't think it's fairly easy for pretty much anyone to get their hands on assault rifles. i can think of about 6 friends/acquaintances off the top of my head that own some. also, still horrified and thinking it has to be some kind of epic trolling joke that people still actually think "oh the bad people will still get them anyways so you might as well not even try" Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Yes. The problem is, the CDC is barred from it. Why? The NRA didn't like it. And Congress defunded it until they complied. “The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.” http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence That's our NRA. I understand that. But, I'm not sure I fully support a major gun legislation without that. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 zoogs pretty much hit the nail on the head, and saunders you're dreaming if you don't think it's fairly easy for pretty much anyone to get their hands on assault rifles. i can think of about 6 friends/acquaintances off the top of my head that own some. also, still horrified and thinking it has to be some kind of epic trolling joke that people still actually think "oh the bad people will still get them anyways so you might as well not even try" and...how do we stop people from getting guns in areas where murder is the highest rate? Link to comment
Saunders Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 zoogs pretty much hit the nail on the head, and saunders you're dreaming if you don't think it's fairly easy for pretty much anyone to get their hands on assault rifles. i can think of about 6 friends/acquaintances off the top of my head that own some. They own automatic rifles? So do they have trusts set up or class 3 licenses because they're a firearms dealer? 1 Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 zoogs pretty much hit the nail on the head, and saunders you're dreaming if you don't think it's fairly easy for pretty much anyone to get their hands on assault rifles. i can think of about 6 friends/acquaintances off the top of my head that own some. They own automatic rifles? So do they have trusts set up or class 3 licenses because they're a firearms dealer? nope Link to comment
Saunders Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 zoogs pretty much hit the nail on the head, and saunders you're dreaming if you don't think it's fairly easy for pretty much anyone to get their hands on assault rifles. i can think of about 6 friends/acquaintances off the top of my head that own some. They own automatic rifles? So do they have trusts set up or class 3 licenses because they're a firearms dealer? nope Nope to the first question, or the 2nd? Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 zoogs pretty much hit the nail on the head, and saunders you're dreaming if you don't think it's fairly easy for pretty much anyone to get their hands on assault rifles. i can think of about 6 friends/acquaintances off the top of my head that own some. also, still horrified and thinking it has to be some kind of epic trolling joke that people still actually think "oh the bad people will still get them anyways so you might as well not even try" and...how do we stop people from getting guns in areas where murder is the highest rate? Well, a pretty obvious start from a numbers standpoint is by there being fewer guns for them to get their hands on. I'm not the person to offer great analysis into the gritty minute details of policy, because I'm not smart enough to see how all of those pieces fit together. But there are a few very obvious steps that HELP towards the cause, even if they don't eliminate. People probably said the same thing in the 70's and 80's about people driving drunk. How we do we stop determined drunks from getting behind the wheel? Well, they started implementing some proactive steps to try and work towards that end, and in a few decades cut the number of DUIs by 66%. DUIs will never go away, and some people will always make poor judgments, but think of how many lives have been saved by the harsher penalties and the higher drinking age that have been statistically proven to have made a big difference. 1 Link to comment
Landlord Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 nope to both saunders. not really sure how they got them, but they aren't dealers nor are they affluent Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 nope to both saunders. not really sure how they got them, but they aren't dealers nor are they affluent So you are saying your poor, non fire arms dealer friends own automatic assault rifles? Is that legal? 1 Link to comment
Saunders Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 nope to both saunders. not really sure how they got them, but they aren't dealers nor are they affluent So, they're rifles, not automatics. That's what I was getting at. I have an AR-15, and it's functionally identical to the mini-14 hunting rifle I learned to shoot with 20 years ago, and they have been in existence for 60 years. Automatic weapons are no longer manufactured and sold to civilians, so the only ones out there for civilians are the limited number of pre-ban ones (and are in the $15-20K range) or have connections. Any automatics built after 1986 are only available for corporations, police, and military, government entities. 1 Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 People probably said the same thing in the 70's and 80's about people driving drunk. How we do we stop determined drunks from getting behind the wheel? Well, they started implementing some proactive steps to try and work towards that end, and in a few decades cut the number of DUIs by 66%. DUIs will never go away, and some people will always make poor judgments, but think of how many lives have been saved by the harsher penalties and the higher drinking age that have been statistically proven to have made a big difference. Right, that's the thing: policy change can have an influence. It might not be the right influence, so of course you want to make sure it's good policy change. There will never be a cure all, but maybe there can be steps forward. This is only a counter argument to "everything must stay the same and we cannot talk about it", though. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Why don't we ask all those who intend to kill others with a gun to come forward and turn in their guns? 1 Link to comment
Decked Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 I think it's worth noting that most gun crimes are committed with pistols, not assault rifles. Very easy to conceal a pistol compared to your standard AR. 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts