How to reduce gun deaths in US

[Freedomisneverfree]

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

 

[Stann]

Surely you have a list of victims.

The over 3,500 fraud cases against him. ALL the plaintiffs.

 

[woodwork201]

This woman is a convicted felon who was carrying a firearm illegally

The penalty for that should be a MANDATORY 5 years on jail, with no chance for parole or early release, and cannot non wavered by some asshole lib judge

If gun grabbing libs are serious about reducing gun deaths this is the place to start

Wow. Mac-7 the gun controller. Of course Bruen is wrong because it is still too restrictive on the protections of the 2nd Amendment but even going with those restrictive tests, can you show a single law from 1791 that forbade felons from owning guns? Or, in your mind it is that Bruen is far too liberal and we need a lot more gun control than what Bruen would allow?

 

[woodwork201]

To show directly that a reduced number of guns available to the general population DOES reduce gun deaths....duh! Gun control measures in other countries, do by far, work. ^Shrug^. Now, large scale gun confiscation is not going to happen in this country, not in our lifetimes anyway. But these comparisons do tend to highlight the resistance to sensible gun laws by the gun nut crowd that "shall not be infringed" means you can have a shoulder fired missile and a howitzer in your house if you want.

Reporting "gun deaths" and "gun crime" is a meaningless statistic. The only valid measure is "deaths" and "crime" though you could prefix each with "violent".

Yes, eliminating all guns would eliminate all gun deaths by the people but it would not effect the number of deaths overall and certainly not keep the number of government deaths flat.

 

[woodwork201]

Using the woman in this story as an example she does not deserve the death penality

She does however need to but put away for a long time - 5 years seems about right

That is the only way to deter criminals from carrying firearms

Disarming me will not stop them

Why can't people not in prison carry guns? Is that constitutional in your mind? Or is that an infringement on their right to keep and bear arms?

 

[woodwork201]

There’s debate as to whether access to guns increases suicide rates.

But this thread has nothing to do with that since you’re complaining about criminals using guns to commit crimes, and people committing suicide aren’t criminals.

If putting people in jail were the answer, we wouldn’t be having this problem given we put more people in jail than almost anyone.

The only debate is amongst leftists standing in the corner of their assylum room arguing with themselves.

The rest of us know that Japan has far more suicides than does the United States but has almost no guns at all, not even the police have many. So, no, guns are not the cause of suicide. They're but one tool of suicide but there are many tools. Before opioids were made so hard to get, overdoses far outnumbered guns. If guns are outlawed then hanging will outnumber guns. Or driving into a tree will outnumber guns. Just as mass-stabbings show that you can't stop a determined mass killer, you also cannot stop a decided self-killer. No one with doubts shoots themselves in the head.

Those with doubts do what, to my eternal sadness, my brother did; he taped a hose to his barely open window of his car and the other end of the hose to his exhaust - and he did it on the side of the busiest highway in Salt Lake City and not a single person stopped to help. Which actually shows that people are the number one cause of suicide - those who do not recognize when someone begs for help or they ignore the signs. Tools don't cause suicide; people cause suicide.

 

[woodwork201]

Nations with tough gun laws don’t have 30K gun deaths. That would be another way to go.

There's no such thing as a "gun death". That's a lie you and others use to fool the ignorant voting masses. Every death where there's a gun involved should be called "a death" and not "a gun death". The presumption is that every single one of them would have happened with a knife, or a rope, or a tree, or drugs, or in some other way. Reducing "gun deaths" does nothing at all to reduce deaths.

 

[woodwork201]

This is just a bait article to stir up emotions on both sides. If we're talking about guns we have to start from a reasonable place and not allow emotions to get in the way of common sense solutions to the problem and there is a problem with guns in this country. Just listen to the news on any given day. Cooler heads must prevail.

No; there's no "cooler heads must prevail" and there's no talks or negotiations. Every gun owner in the Country could vote, along with the entire left in America, to agree to an AR-15 ban, for instance, and it still cannot be done. The Constitution says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." You can't vote on it. You can't negotiate it. The conversation was held from 1789 through 1791 and the vote was completed on December 15, 1791. It's done; it's settled. Get used to it and get over it.

 

[candycorn]

There's no such thing as a "gun death".

 

[woodwork201]

Only by taking rights away from law-abiding citizens

Any result is possible if the government is ruthless enough

No, nothing about crime has ever been proven by the Government taking away the rights of law-abiding citizens. Taking away one tool only leads to the next tool. In the UK, they went from banning guns but the criminals moved to knives. When they banned knives, the criminals went to other weapons such that, today, you can get arrested for a combination wrench or socket set with ratchet, if you can't provide a good reason for having it in your car.

What makes mankind mankind is that we have the ability to use tools. We're able to solve problems by selecting the most appropriate tool from the set of available tools, and solve our problems with whatever's best and available.

 

[Stann]

The only debate is amongst leftists standing in the corner of their assylum room arguing with themselves.

The rest of us know that Japan has far more suicides than does the United States but has almost no guns at all, not even the police have many. So, no, guns are not the cause of suicide. They're but one tool of suicide but there are many tools. Before opioids were made so hard to get, overdoses far outnumbered guns. If guns are outlawed then hanging will outnumber guns. Or driving into a tree will outnumber guns. Just as mass-stabbings show that you can't stop a determined mass killer, you also cannot stop a decided self-killer. No one with doubts shoots themselves in the head.

Those with doubts do what, to my eternal sadness, my brother did; he taped a hose to his barely open window of his car and the other end of the hose to his exhaust - and he did it on the side of the busiest highway in Salt Lake City and not a single person stopped to help. Which actually shows that people are the number one cause of suicide - those who do not recognize when someone begs for help or they ignore the signs. Tools don't cause suicide; people cause suicide.

The comparison of suicide rates between the US and Japan is a very poor one. There are vast cultural differences about suicide between the two. Suicide in Japan has been raised to an aesthetic experience. Very tolerated to the point that in many cases it is seen as the morally responsible thing to do.

 

[Stann]

No, nothing about crime has ever been proven by the Government taking away the rights of law-abiding citizens. Taking away one tool only leads to the next tool. In the UK, they went from banning guns but the criminals moved to knives. When they banned knives, the criminals went to other weapons such that, today, you can get arrested for a combination wrench or socket set with ratchet, if you can't provide a good reason for having it in your car.

What makes mankind mankind is that we have the ability to use tools. We're able to solve problems by selecting the most appropriate tool from the set of available tools, and solve our problems with whatever's best and available.

Violence is not a solution.

 

[Stann]

No; there's no "cooler heads must prevail" and there's no talks or negotiations. Every gun owner in the Country could vote, along with the entire left in America, to agree to an AR-15 ban, for instance, and it still cannot be done. The Constitution says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." You can't vote on it. You can't negotiate it. The conversation was held from 1789 through 1791 and the vote was completed on December 15, 1791. It's done; it's settled. Get used to it and get over it.

And all that was in the context of a well-maintained militia. ( There was no federal military at the time only state militias. Today's National Guard units. The law was about them not civilians.

 

[woodwork201]

Thats sounds good on the surface but we both know that isnt happening in practice

Any convicted criminal carrying an illegal firearm should serve a mandatory prison term

I suggest 5 years

But even 3 without early release would be helpful

Can you quote which constitutional amendment added the "except" clause after "shall not be infringed"?

 

[woodwork201]

You can have your right to easy access to firearms,

Where's it say that? I mean in like the Constitution.

 

[woodwork201]

And all that was in the context of a well-maintained militia. ( There was no federal military at the time only state militias. Today's National Guard units. The law was about them not civilians.

No; when the Founders wanted to talk about the States, they said, "the states". When they wanted to talk about the people, they said, "the people". Try reading the Constitution; I know it was written at an 8th grade level so you might need to get one of your nurses to read it to you but come back and I can explain anything in it that you weren't able to understand.

 

[woodwork201]

I can sympathize with your view, but "mandatory" sentences are always totally and completely illegal and in contradiction to the whole process of justice where you are judges and sentences by the court you are in, and not the legislators ahead of time.
The Bill of Rights demands the judge have absolute power when it comes to applying mitigating circumstances.

I don't know that the Bill of Rights requires that; perhaps the right to a trial. But the

By changing the gun culture.

If you take horse and carts, and the early cars, everyone went everywhere all over the road. Then which side of the road you stuck to, licences, driving tests and so on and so on came into effect, transportation morphed over 100 years.

Take guns. Take American guns. Take gun ownership. Take a proportion of American gun owners. Stuck in the year of 1776. They believe they're the good guy thinking it's acceptable to shoot others.

And I've just outlined America's gun problem.

The good guy, blindly, passes themselves off as the good guy, they contribute equally with the bad guy to create the gun problem. It'll be easier to set up a colony on Mars than change the retarded brain cells of an American gun nut.

It used to be, and I almost said it, that those pesky 1st Amendment, Freedom-of-Speechers were the same way, stuck in 1776. But they're not any longer, are they? The left is as solidly against freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press as they are against the right to keep and bear arms. But they used to like those other things. Remember?