CDZ Posting Solutions for Gun Violence

[task0778]

You show me a place that advertises itself as a gun-free zone and I'll show you a target just waiting for a terrorist or whacko nutjob to walk in and kill a bunch of people. Most of the times when a large number of people were shot and killed were times where there was nobody there to shoot back. We'll never know how many shootings/killings did not take place because the would-be shooter found out there would be somebody shooting back fairly quickly.

I also like the idea that many states are adopting to give police the authority to temporarily confiscate a person's guns until a determination can be made by a judge that you are not a danger to yourself or others if you are allowed to keep your weapons. Like that kid in Florida that shot all those kids at the school a few weeks before the school year ended, it's crazy to let a guy like that with so many red flags continue to keep his guns.

Other thing is, with some of these shootings the shooter got the weapons from someone else because they couldn't legally or financially get for themselves. So - I think we've got to hold people accountable for shootings done with their weapons even when they had no other involvement. Particularly a semi-auto weapon that can fire quite a few bullets in a very short time. Those weapons probably should be more closely accounted for than an ordinary rifle or pistol revolver. You might not be responsible for the shooting, but I do think you are responsible for the weapon used if it was yours and you didn't enough precautions to make sure it didn't fall into the wrong hands.

Are these things the definitive answer, and will they prevent all future shootings? NO. But there's no way and no solution that can guarantee that, the best we can do is reduce the number of shootings and reduce the number of casualties as much as possible. Some people don't like the idea of armed security guards in our schools, well I don't like the idea of some nutjob walking into a school with weapons, knowing nobody with a gun will shoot at him.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Guns are more valued than kids.

Fact.

The Futility of Trying to Prevent More School Shootings in America

As long as there is easy access to guns, there’s no way parents, teachers, and other specialists can thwart every violent teenager.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I am looking for solutions to gun violence. All sides. All sides need to be heard equally. Insulting a person is NOT a solution but part of the problem. IF you are going to post angry, do it somewhere else. If you are going to just troll, do it somewhere else. Post solutions as you see it and then let's discuss it.

Care to take that challenge?

/——/ Open Carry and concealed carry nation -wide would end 90% of the violence.

In 1871, Open Carry and Concealed Weapons WERE 90% of the violence in the Western Towns. This is why most of them went to no weapons to be carried outside of the homes inside of city limits. It was that way for more than 100 years. And that brought their murder rate down to a managable level. With everyone open carrying too many petty arguments were decided with guns. I don't think we have changed that much.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Anyone using a gun to commit a crime gets shot in the head.

I think you would find gun crime would go way down.

Easy Peasy

After we repeal the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th Amendments, of course.

So much for a ‘clean’ or ‘serious’ discussion.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I think what would fix gun violence is quick executions ordered by a court soon after arrest for most crimes. That is, crimes where we know the perpetrator, which is nearly all crimes. I would put narrow limits on --- have to know the perpetrator for sure, no lawyers or juries, just judges, If it's theft or destruction of property the damage should be valued at a given minimum ($1000?) and the perp should be double digits in age for crimes of violence and maybe 16 for property destruction or theft.

The important thing is simply to get rid of the criminals. We coddle them now and keep cycling them back onto the street again and again, like Nikolas Cruz.

And another vote for repealing the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th Amendments.

 

[Circe]

And another vote for repealing the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th Amendments.

Naaaaah, In early America "hang 'em high" was the RULE --- they didn't fool around with prisons in the old days. Getting rid of the criminals works fine with the Constitution. You can try -- with jury -- all the people who probably dunnit, but who weren't caught holding a smoking gun. The rest, goners.

I'm assuming everyone would be fine with self-defense, of course. That would not be considered a crime.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am looking for solutions to gun violence. All sides. All sides need to be heard equally. Insulting a person is NOT a solution but part of the problem. IF you are going to post angry, do it somewhere else. If you are going to just troll, do it somewhere else. Post solutions as you see it and then let's discuss it.

Care to take that challenge?

/——/ Open Carry and concealed carry nation -wide would end 90% of the violence.

Actually not.

In fact, there is no evidence in support of the notion that the carrying of firearms reduces gun crime and violence.

https://www.texastribune.org/2015/09/24/study-says-concealed-carry-permits-dont-affect-cri/

Citizens have the individual right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense, not act in the capacity of ‘law enforcement’ or to otherwise ‘deter’ crime.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And another vote for repealing the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th Amendments.

Naaaaah, In early America "hang 'em high" was the RULE --- they didn't fool around with prisons in the old days. Getting rid of the criminals works fine with the Constitution. You can try -- with jury -- all the people who probably dunnit, but who weren't caught holding a smoking gun. The rest, goners.

I'm assuming everyone would be fine with self-defense, of course. That would not be considered a crime.

Let's take a look at that.

Most were actually sent to prison, not hung. Hanging was extremely rare. Maybe in the Movies. And long prison terms were also very rare. This actually goes back to the tradition of the British Court System. In the Western States there were many people sentenced to hang but most were either pardoned, jailed or died before the sentence could be carried out. Most people frowned on the practice. According the Movies, it was a public circus. In reality, it wasn't. What usually happened was that the Judge that had a taste for hanging was replaced by one that would elect to send the person to prison instead unless it was a extremely heinous crime like rape and murder and then the person would not likely live long enough to reach the gallows anyway. Penny Dreadfuls made the West sound completely different than it really was.

As for self defense. If you had two people square off, they had better make sure of the town law first. Many western towns had a law that gun fighting was illegal. And the winner would be tried for Manslaughter. If both survived, both would be tried. If convicted, they just might spend a couple or three years in the State Pen. This turned many would be gunfights into fist fights which would only get you a few days in the county hoosgow and a fine.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I am looking for solutions to gun violence. All sides. All sides need to be heard equally. Insulting a person is NOT a solution but part of the problem. IF you are going to post angry, do it somewhere else. If you are going to just troll, do it somewhere else. Post solutions as you see it and then let's discuss it.

Care to take that challenge?

/——/ Open Carry and concealed carry nation -wide would end 90% of the violence.

Actually not.

In fact, there is no evidence in support of the notion that the carrying of firearms reduces gun crime and violence.

https://www.texastribune.org/2015/09/24/study-says-concealed-carry-permits-dont-affect-cri/

Citizens have the individual right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense, not act in the capacity of ‘law enforcement’ or to otherwise ‘deter’ crime.

On that same note: When it was legal for ALL to open carry before the town gun laws passed starting in 1871, the accidental deaths from stray bullets, the petty arguments settled by gun battles and such were to many to tolerate. To have almost your total population armed like that is more than skirting with disaster. We have already been through that. I like the Licensing of the CCW. Those types have never been a problem. If you have ever been through that class, you will think long and hard before you even think about pulling your weapon. It is also applicable to those with FFL licenses. They have never been a problem either. Licensing seems to weed out the bad ones and leave the good ones. Maybe the trick would be to regulate by licensing the person taking any weapon out of the homes in any capacity other than transporting to and from the range or gun shop. I know that hunters would go crazy over that idea and I don't know if that's the answer.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Doing nothing about gun violence is unacceptable and not an option, yet everything proposed will do little to stop gun crime and violence.

‘Banning’ guns is not an option; doing so would not only fail to address the problem, it would likely be un-Constitutional as well. For example, fewer than two percent of overall gun crime and violence is committed with long guns, rendering pointless the ‘banning’ of firearms designated as assault weapons.

Age restrictions, waiting periods, and magazine capacity limitations are also ineffective and useless.

And more guns is not the answer – turning our neighborhoods, schools, and places of employment into armed camps will do nothing to make us safer.

Perhaps the first step to finding a solution would be consensus as to what won’t work.

 

[Jessica123]

How about when you go on an mass shooting you forfeit your life and constitutional rights?

What I am walking about is the cop or an citizen can kill you on the spot and there's no chance at living to see another day...A cop can line you up against the wall and blow your brains out for your idiocy. I am sure some of these bastards would think twice.

Execute kids = get executed without a trial.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

How about when you go on an mass shooting you forfeit your life and constitutional rights?

What I am walking about is the cop or an citizen can kill you on the spot and there's no chance at living to see another day...A cop can line you up against the wall and blow your brains out for your idiocy. I am sure some of these bastards would think twice.

Execute kids = get executed without a trial.

Even a mass murderer is going to get a trial. You can't suspend the constitution no matter how vile the crime.

 

[Claudette]

And another vote for repealing the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th Amendments.

Naaaaah, In early America "hang 'em high" was the RULE --- they didn't fool around with prisons in the old days. Getting rid of the criminals works fine with the Constitution. You can try -- with jury -- all the people who probably dunnit, but who weren't caught holding a smoking gun. The rest, goners.

I'm assuming everyone would be fine with self-defense, of course. That would not be considered a crime.

Bingo. That's just what happened. If you broke the law you either got hanged if the crime was bad enough or you ended up in a hellhole prison. No one was worried about the rights of the criminal. They sure had no problem hanging em.

 

[2aguy]

330 million Americans in the USA and millions and millions of guns and the USA is a very peaceful place . I see no real problem with gun violence except for what has been call Black Swan events which simply means that there are some very unusual events [school shootings] every once in awhile . Fix the areas like schools or gun free zones where there are no men with guns . Then look at Courthouses and Government buildings where there are men with guns all over the place to see peaceful surroundings Daryl .

1. Only Some Americans own MOST of the Guns. Most Americans don't own any guns.

2. We are way past the "Every once in awhile" on the School Shootings

3. Schools should not be armed camps. Not real indusive to a good learning curve.

4. Courthouses are where you are supposed to have the bad guys. This is where you jail them (most jails are either in them or next to them), charge them and try them. In a way, it IS a gun free zone. Just the Cops have the guns. I just went through jury selection a few days ago and I really don't want the students of any school to have to go through that kind of entry point. Some are already doing it. A Courthouse is Supposed to much more dangerous than a Public School.

Now, how about let's work out how we do the solutions instead of just hashing out the problems. And let's not not use the tired old talking points. Talking Points are only designed to try and make the other person look dumber. In reality, they just make everyone using them look dumber.

1) Wrong....

NBC Poll: Does Gun Ownership Increase Or Decrease Safety? Anti-Gun Activists Won't Like The Results.

nearly 6 in 10 Americans believe that getting guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens increases safety.

"In the poll, 58 percent agree with the statement that gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves," NBC News reports. "By contrast, 38 percent say that gun ownership reduces safety by giving too many people access to firearms, increasing the chances for accidental misuse."

------

NBC notes that the overall result is a "reversal" of the findings of a 1999 survey that found that 52 percent of respondents believed gun ownership reduced safety. The more positive perspective on gun ownership is partly reflected in gun ownership trends: "47 percent of American adults say they have a firearm in the household, which is up from 44 percent in 1999."

2) Wrong....

Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say

Their research also finds that shooting incidents involving students have been declining since the 1990s.

------

Four times the number of children were killed in schools in the early 1990s than today, Fox said.

“There is not an epidemic of school shootings,” he said, adding that more kids are killed each year from pool drownings or bicycle accidents. There are around 55 million school children in the United States, and on average over the past 25 years, about 10 students per year were killed by gunfire at school, according to Fox and Fridel’s research.

3) Wrong....

mass shooters target gun free zones.....Israel stopped terrorist attacks on their schools by putting armed guards in their schools, it worked. Arming and training staff and eliminating democrat gun free zones would keep mass shooters from targeting schools, which are easy targets and killing zones for mentally ill students inspired by the CNN TownHall, anti gun rallies and school walk outs that were created after the Parkland shooting......

4) Wrong...

One armed guard in a school is nice, but they can be targeted by mass shooters or as happened in Parkland, you had one guard for over 10 buildings and over 3,200 students, not including staff....schools are gun free, courtrooms are not...for example, congress has 2,500 police officers to keep 535 members of congress safe, and if a member of congress is a specific target or is threatened, they get tax payer paid for bodyguards.....

Americans use their guns 2.5 million times a year to stop violent rapes, robberies and murders....according to the CDC....and what has happened since the 1990s when more Americans own and carry guns?

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[2aguy]

I am looking for solutions to gun violence. All sides. All sides need to be heard equally. Insulting a person is NOT a solution but part of the problem. IF you are going to post angry, do it somewhere else. If you are going to just troll, do it somewhere else. Post solutions as you see it and then let's discuss it.

Care to take that challenge?

This is easy...

1) for criminals.....any use of a gun for a rape, robbery or murder gets a minimum sentence of 30 years.....additional time if the weapon is fired.......this is how Japan has kept the Yakuza from using guns and grenades in their gang wars.....

2) For mass public shooters......

--get rid of gun free zones. We know from actually research on mass shooters that they target democrat gun free zones....so allowing normal, law abiding gun owners to actually carry their guns into schools, malls, theaters.....would keep mass shooters from targeting those places....

--stop publishing the shooters names and only give minimal coverage to any mass shooting. The hyper coverage of the Parkland shooting, and the anti gun hysteria, the CNN Townhall, the anti gun rallies and the school walk outs were luck chum in the water to the most recent teenagers....they saw all of the commotion created by the Parkland shooter and it encouraged them to seek the same for themselves.....

That is how you stop criminals and mass shooters....anything else is just an attempt to fulfill the irrational hatred of guns and gun owners...if you want to actually stop criminals and mass shooters, do the above...otherwise, you are simply not interested in stoppting these killers....

 

[2aguy]

Much better background check system that actually includes all felons and dv convictions and any ERPO removal of guns. This needs to be kept accurate and current and it needs to apply to every purchase of a gun and any transfers that are not between immediate family members.

IF a legal gun owner loses or has a gun stolen, the owner MUST report it to police. Otherwise, if the gun is used in a crime, that owner shares legal responsibility for the crime.

Ban AR-15's and similar assault rifles.

Sorry......background checks for private sales leads to gun registration which will be used for confiscation. There is no benefit to private sale background checks.....mass shooters do not use private sales to get their guns, and the ones who used a straw buyer, did so because they already couldn't get the gun legally, making the background check irrelevant....

The truth about background checks...

Gun Control Won't Stop Crime

“Universal” Background Checks
Part of the genius of the Bloomberg gun control system is how it creates prohibitions indirectly. Bloomberg’s so-called “universal” background check scheme is a prime example. These bills are never just about having background checks on the private sales of firearms. That aspect is the part that the public is told about. Yet when you read the Bloomberg laws, you find that checks on private sales are the tip of a very large iceberg of gun prohibition.

First, the bills criminalize a vast amount of innocent activity. Suppose you are an nra Certified Instructor teaching an introductory safety class. Under your supervision, students will handle a variety of unloaded firearms. They will learn how different guns have different safeties, and they will learn the safe way to hand a firearm to another person. But thanks to Bloomberg, these classroom firearm lessons are now illegal in Washington state, unless the class takes place at a shooting range.

It’s now also illegal to lend a gun to your friend, so that you can shoot together at a range on your own property. Or to lend a firearm for a week to your neighbor who is being stalked.

Under the Bloomberg system, gun loans are generally forbidden, unless the gun owner and the borrower both go to a gun store first. The store must process the loan as if the store were selling the gun out of its inventory.

Then, when your friend wants to return your gun to you, both of you must go to the gun store again. This time, the store will process that transaction as if you were buying the gun from the store’s inventory. For both the loan and the return of the gun, you will have to pay whatever fees the store charges, and whatever fees the government might charge. The gun store will have to keep a permanent record of you, your friend and the gun, including the gun’s serial number. Depending on the state or city, the government might also keep a permanent record.

In other words, the “background check” law is really a law to expand gun registration—and registration lists are used for confiscation. Consider New York City. In 1967, violent crime in the city was out of control. So the City Council and Mayor John Lindsay required registration of all long guns. The criminals, obviously, did not comply. Thanks to the 1911 Sullivan Act, New York City already had established registration lists for handgun owners.

Then, in 1991, the City Council decided that many lawfully registered firearms were now illegal “assault weapons.” The New York Police Department used the registration lists to ensure that the guns were either surrendered to the government or moved out of the city. When he was mayor of New York City, Bloomberg did the same, after the “assault weapon” law was expanded to cover any rifle or shotgun with an ammunition capacity greater than five rounds.

In Australia and Great Britain—which are often cited as models for the U.S. to follow—registration lists were used for gun confiscation. In Great Britain, this included all handguns; in Australia, handguns over .38 caliber. Both countries banned all semi-automatic or pump-action long guns.

Most American jurisdictions don’t have a comprehensive gun registration system. But even if your state legislature has outlawed gun registration, firearm stores must keep records. Those records could be harvested for future confiscations. Under the Bloomberg system, the store’s list would include not just the guns that the store actually sold, but all the guns (and their owners) that the store processed, for friends or relatives borrowing guns.

 

[sparky]

Care to take that challenge?

My $.02?

It's a tool

Learn how to use ,store & maintain it properly

not exactly a universal 'fix' , but it would be a nice start to erradicate some of the complete idiocy and abuse out there

~S

 

[2aguy]

Much better background check system that actually includes all felons and dv convictions and any ERPO removal of guns. This needs to be kept accurate and current and it needs to apply to every purchase of a gun and any transfers that are not between immediate family members.

IF a legal gun owner loses or has a gun stolen, the owner MUST report it to police. Otherwise, if the gun is used in a crime, that owner shares legal responsibility for the crime.

Ban AR-15's and similar assault rifles.

1. You are talking about National Background Checks. I agree. And background checks for all sales and transfers of weapons. The common person can still get the firearms easy enough and the criminal just lost one of his most sought after ways of procuring guns. And I would include inter family transfers as well.

2. If a Gun Owner has a gun stolen or lost and doesn't report it then he should be held totally responsible for how the gun is used. Same thing if he loans it out. He should be tried as if he were the one holding it. Firearm Security should not be such a joke.

No Firearms can be banned. You can bump it up to the next level though. Make it so that you have to have a FFL license to own one. Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all. They abide by the laws, keep their firearms secure and don't go loaning them out to others. You want to steal the guns from a Gun Collector, better bring the tools to take out the entire side of his house so you can run your forklift inside and haul off his walk in gun safe. Meanwhile, all those pesky alarms going off and those ridiculous cops showing up to arrest your butt. The good news is, any one of us that can pass a current background check to obtain a hand gun can also pass a federal FFL License background check. Just pay the 200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements. So don't ban it, regulate it.

Yes...those 3 suggestions show you are not serious about stopping criminals or mass shooters...you simply want to punish people who own guns, and you want to put them in legal peril for the act of buying, owning and carrying a gun......

How about focusing on stopping criminals and mass shooters....which none of what you posted will do one thing to stop.

Those with Firearms Licenses have NEVER been any problem at all

Yes.......there is no need to license law abiding gun owners, they will be law abiding without the piece of paper....the criminals cannot own, buy or carry guns so they can't get a license in the first place....this is where you can't see the truth.....

And of course....you have your Poll Tax.....a tax on the exercise of a Right which is unConstitutional......and the securtiy requirements, will be increased to the point where only the rich can own guns...as they already do in Europe.....

200 bucks every 5 years and meet the security requirements.

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

Held:
- A municipal ordinance which, as construed and applied, requires religious colporteurs to pay a license tax as a condition to the pursuit of their activities, is invalid under the Federal Constitution as a denial of freedom of speech, press and religion.
- A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.
- The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

Opinion:

...It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax -- a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution....

... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down...

... It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise...
Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

 

[2aguy]

330 million Americans in the USA and millions and millions of guns and the USA is a very peaceful place . I see no real problem with gun violence except for what has been call Black Swan events which simply means that there are some very unusual events [school shootings] every once in awhile . Fix the areas like schools or gun free zones where there are no men with guns . Then look at Courthouses and Government buildings where there are men with guns all over the place to see peaceful surroundings Daryl .

Yup. They should have metal detectors at all school and locked door except for ingress. We have them at all the court houses and they work.

Our schools already have officers on site. One of them was killed at the last school shooting down here. Have armed guards in all schools. Guards who will shoot.

I think you meant Egress. And I do like the idea of armed and trained Security Guards at Schools who are kept current. I don't like the idea of trying to force Teachers to be armed. Armed Teachers buy more problems than it cures. Metal Detectors really aren't a bad idea either if that is what it takes. But I don't want to see anything quite like what you would see at a Court House where you know you will have some really bad characters in there and need to have some equally bad characters to counteract them while they are going through the legal process. Students should not be treated like criminals.

Armed Teachers buy more problems than it cures. Metal Detectors really aren't a bad idea either if that is what it takes.

You mean except for the 14-18 states that already allow armed and trained staff....you mean except for the years and years of experience that they already have....right?

 

[2aguy]

You show me a place that advertises itself as a gun-free zone and I'll show you a target just waiting for a terrorist or whacko nutjob to walk in and kill a bunch of people. Most of the times when a large number of people were shot and killed were times where there was nobody there to shoot back. We'll never know how many shootings/killings did not take place because the would-be shooter found out there would be somebody shooting back fairly quickly.

I also like the idea that many states are adopting to give police the authority to temporarily confiscate a person's guns until a determination can be made by a judge that you are not a danger to yourself or others if you are allowed to keep your weapons. Like that kid in Florida that shot all those kids at the school a few weeks before the school year ended, it's crazy to let a guy like that with so many red flags continue to keep his guns.

Other thing is, with some of these shootings the shooter got the weapons from someone else because they couldn't legally or financially get for themselves. So - I think we've got to hold people accountable for shootings done with their weapons even when they had no other involvement. Particularly a semi-auto weapon that can fire quite a few bullets in a very short time. Those weapons probably should be more closely accounted for than an ordinary rifle or pistol revolver. You might not be responsible for the shooting, but I do think you are responsible for the weapon used if it was yours and you didn't enough precautions to make sure it didn't fall into the wrong hands.

Are these things the definitive answer, and will they prevent all future shootings? NO. But there's no way and no solution that can guarantee that, the best we can do is reduce the number of shootings and reduce the number of casualties as much as possible. Some people don't like the idea of armed security guards in our schools, well I don't like the idea of some nutjob walking into a school with weapons, knowing nobody with a gun will shoot at him.

Confiscating guns? The only way to make this even remotely Constitutional would be to pay for all the legal fees, court costs and time lost from work for the victim of these red flag laws.....if the STate can take the guns, and then the individual can't afford a lawyer, can't afford the time away from work to go to court.....then the state can simply make the confiscation permanent no matter what the status is of the individual....

All fees must be paid for by the State, including the 300 dollar an hour lawyer they should be allowed to hire and have paid for by the state......that is a bare minimum....