mare
Full Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_darkblue.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_darkblue.png)
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by mare on Oct 2, 2017 16:45:06 GMT -5
Mental health checks for gun ownership Full Gun Registration---mental health issues, no guns and or confiscated if mental health issues develop Venues need to have Secret Service type of screening. We will need to screen and plan for open air shooters and sniper situations No open carry Concealed carry only in very special circumstances and heavy fees/taxation for that right Every public place would have metal detectors/screening Hotels and resorts would have bag screening All schools have metal detectors and all doors locked. Guests are screened before entering No more sales of any type of semi-automatic weapons No more sales of any type of modification device for any weapon that makes it capable of shooting multiple rounds No sales of certain types of ammo Extensive buyback programs Extensive increase in policing and security Decent, affordable healthcare including mental healthcare
All of these things result in loss of freedom and/or costs which will be passed along to citizens. We have to decide what freedoms we can give up and what things we are willing to implement if any. Doing nothing means we are OK with living with mass shootings because that is exactly what we have done.
|
|
mare
Full Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_darkblue.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_darkblue.png)
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by mare on Oct 2, 2017 16:46:45 GMT -5
By the way, the above are ideas that came to me. Not that I think they will or should all be implemented. The bottom line is that we are doing nothing to curb gun violence in the US.
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 2, 2017 17:05:45 GMT -5
The big, big reason other countries have “sensible gun control” and way less gun violence is because they have been trained not to really want them in the first place. If you restrict access, make them more difficult to get then only the really determined will want them but there will be way less of them because again “culture”.
If gun control supporters honestly use that approach then they hit a wall of defiance and instead increase gun ownership which gun manufacturers love. Fear of losing rights = stocking up.
I know people who taught themselves how to make ammunition because of the proposals on placing limits on owning ammunition. Make cigarettes more expensive with taxation and people learn to roll their own.
I am against gun control in general because it only really has an effect on those who are the least likely to use their guns in a crime.
All these “loophole gun mods” are troubling in my eyes, they probably evade restrictions because mass murders don’t use them “until yesterday”
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 2, 2017 17:47:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by andrea on Oct 2, 2017 18:02:37 GMT -5
He was suicidal/homicidal. This is the key. I wonder if he was on any medications. The guy knew he was in his way out, he was gambling large amounts
|
|
|
Post by Truffles on Oct 2, 2017 18:53:02 GMT -5
No laws are going to deter a determined person. However, restrictions can help reduce the opportunistic ones. Vegas guy knew he was on his way out. No law would have stopped him. His murderous act was premeditated. He planned for it.
Edmonton guy was more of "moment of opportunity" but would have been much worse if we had easier gun laws. If Edmonton guy had easy access to guns, the cop would have been shot and killed, instead of stabbed and alive. The guy would have had time to enter the stadium (30,000+ people) and open fire. He didn't have time because wounded cop fought him. The guy could have been shooting people as he tried to run them over with the truck. The moment of opportunity was never there for him with guns. He still created chaos and hurt people but the chaos was lessened.
Minor restrictions on thing like modding kits and clip size are a start. People still have their guns, but the moment of opportunity shrinks. Only the truly determined ones will be successful (even in countries with stricter laws).
|
|
|
Post by stellarfeller on Oct 2, 2017 19:53:05 GMT -5
Yup, and the officer, even while wounded, protected his firearm and didn’t let the guy get it. They took him down with not a single shot fired.
Whereas in Nevada, there are basically no restrictions whatever on owning and carrying guns. No license, no waiting period, no background checks, nothing. I’m sure that’s exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 2, 2017 20:03:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Truffles on Oct 2, 2017 20:26:14 GMT -5
I'm somewhat agreeing with you, tpatt. You can't change a culture overnight. Small steps. You also can't penalize the law-abiding owners (huge political backlash here regarding long rifles). Modding kits and clip size restrictions aren't going to impact the majority of gun owners.
From my perspective, Americans are way to individualistic to accept major gun restrictions. It will never happen. It's in your psyche. It's not a bad thing. It's just a thing.
The minor restrictions, whether immigrant, refugee, or citizen, will help deter those moments of opportunity. The predetermined killer will always find a way, restrictions or not.
You wanted some definitives and those are what I think would be reasonable, and acceptable, to the majority of Americans. They don't penalize existing owners. I think it would be a palatable compromise.
|
|
|
Post by TapToTalk on Oct 2, 2017 21:04:07 GMT -5
I heard a handful of stories from friends today who had loved ones or relatives in LV. One was at the concert. Thank goodness everyone was okay in that small sample of people. Will hotels have to start scanning people and luggage like airports? I have a feeling all the gun laws in the world wouldn't have stopped this guy from getting guns. His own brother didn't know he had an interest in guns. www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-shooting.html?_r=0
|
|
|
Post by villanelle on Oct 3, 2017 1:22:23 GMT -5
For the todler at the daycare that shot the other toddlers, I think a law increasing penalties when one's weapon is used by someone not authorized to have a weapon (children, some criminals, etc.--basically anyone who couldn't legally buy a gun) might work. If you own the guns and don't store them securely, you are taking on additional risk. That doesn't mean it is illegal to leave your loaded pistol sitting on the coffee table, but it means you are taking on some legal risk when you do so and don't think it through. Will it stop everyone from doing that? Of course not. But maybe it will make some people think.
There are a lot of gray areas to be explored that would still allow people to have weapons. We can honor the 2nd amendment and yet still put more precautions in place. Maybe Jane and John don't get their weapon until Friday instead of Tuesday, but they still get their weapon.
|
|
|
Post by villanelle on Oct 3, 2017 1:29:15 GMT -5
Our culture right now is heavily focused on grievances. We've turned it into a pastime with the media aiding and abetting it 24/7. I bet this guy had a long list of grievances that he catalogued and nursed. Filled with rage turned outward (homicidal) and inward (suicidal). He was going out and he was taking folks with him. I also think we've become like soldiers who sometimes dehumanize the enemy so that it is less pyschologically difficult to them. If it's a bunch of dirty Japs or Krauts, rather than human people, shooting them isn't a big deal. Now, instead of Japs and Krauts, it's Libtards and [what's a pejorative term for conservatives?] and baby-killers and ragheads and privileged racists and whatever else. The are no longer people with whom we disagree. They are the enemy. And enemies are taken out.
|
|
|
Post by Sprockey on Oct 3, 2017 5:23:42 GMT -5
[/quote]
Libtards and [what's a pejorative term for conservatives?] .[/quote]
Repugnants (or Repugs)
|
|
|
Post by andrea on Oct 3, 2017 6:38:31 GMT -5
Our culture right now is heavily focused on grievances. We've turned it into a pastime with the media aiding and abetting it 24/7. I bet this guy had a long list of grievances that he catalogued and nursed. Filled with rage turned outward (homicidal) and inward (suicidal). He was going out and he was taking folks with him. I also think we've become like soldiers who sometimes dehumanize the enemy so that it is less pyschologically difficult to them. If it's a bunch of dirty Japs or Krauts, rather than human people, shooting them isn't a big deal. Now, instead of Japs and Krauts, it's Libtards and [what's a pejorative term for conservatives?] and baby-killers and ragheads and privileged racists and whatever else. The are no longer people with whom we disagree. They are the enemy. And enemies are taken out. We've been going tribal for a while now. Tribalism/sectarianism is one of the downsides of identity politics and intersectionality.
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 3, 2017 6:48:47 GMT -5
Well the Russians have been studying Americans and social media interactions for a while now and have been caught trolling both sides.
It’s probably part of an experiment to see how the internet can help divide us so we collapse on our own rather than from outside invaders
|
|
|
Post by stellarfeller on Oct 3, 2017 8:09:26 GMT -5
You just cited a massive loss of personal freedom. They may be just fine with it. I am not, nor are many other Americans. I am not obligated to offer up my rights in order to appease every problem that exists. So tell me this - why is it necessary for any civilian to have the personal freedom to possess weapons that are only meant for killing as many humans as possible in the shortest time?
|
|
|
Post by andrea on Oct 3, 2017 9:21:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 3, 2017 9:37:18 GMT -5
I think there are some that are like this but I think these types are not the norm but social media is greatly encouraging increasing acts of stupidity in order to become internet famous
|
|
|
Post by alicechalmers on Oct 3, 2017 13:46:43 GMT -5
You just cited a massive loss of personal freedom. They may be just fine with it. I am not, nor are many other Americans. I am not obligated to offer up my rights in order to appease every problem that exists. So tell me this - why is it necessary for any civilian to have the personal freedom to possess weapons that are only meant for killing as many humans as possible in the shortest time? Those types of guns are already illegal in the US.
|
|
|
Post by Tpatt100 on Oct 3, 2017 14:04:46 GMT -5
|
|