The Gun Control Debate will continue until we find solutions that make sense for people on both sides of the issue.

[White 6]

That's pretty much the explanation that's expected, and it makes your comment valid. But gun violence of the order on which we are exploring is a one time crime, and it comes back to the shooter being a good guy with a gun until he takes his gun to school and becomes the bad guy.
You've at least tried to 'qualify' the crime!
But then the old pro-gun talking point on the fact that gun control won't prevent a future shooter from getting a gun, comes back from the pro-gunners. And it's valid!

And that's where I come in to introduce the fact that it's not the guns, it's the 'culture' of wars and the perceived need to kill people with their guns.

You're not being reasonable at all! You're still stuck on matters that are unrelated to the problem, and you too still refuse to accept the 'culture of wars and killing with guns.

Michael Moore emphasizes the truth but it's not surprising that Americans continue to reject it. Amazingly, even parents who have lost children to gun violence reject it in most cases!

In respect to your efforts White, you're convincing on showing that you care! But can you take the next step by caring enough? You're certainly smart enough to know that you haven't come up with a solution that can make a difference.

More people are killed or shot and survive, one or two at a time, than in mass murders. My point is exactly the point, where you just want to concentrate on the most shocking occasions. My answers in this thread stand a better chance of (not stopping, but) making a difference than anything put forth by the "protect our guns at all costs" crowd. I say give common sense in a crowded society a chance. I have no problem regulating on the basis of criminality, who has weapons on the street, and requiring permit (with training, testing and background check prior to issue) at the same time, I have no problem with stop and frisk to take weapons out of the hands of criminals on the street, if they are not permitted to carry or own, and like I said, I have no problem with banning long guns from street carry except in purchase or going into repair facilities or ranges. I can easily live with it, as I am and always have been in compliance, just out of good common sense (having been raised with weapons, trained with weapons) and in support of good citizenship in a crowded society of law and order.

 

[Ace Nova]

I don't think you are making the right points....for example...

Think of it like this: If you're a drug dealer or drug user, you won't go to jail for the drugs you possess but you will likely face heavy jail time for possessing a gun.

The gun part is just not true...in fact, the gun charge is one of the first charges dropped by prosecutors....to the point you have criminals with multiple gun felonies who are released, often on no cash bail.....

Our problem is currently from the democrat party.....they attack the police to the point they. can't, or won't do their jobs for fear of being destroyed.....and the democrat party judges, prosecutors and politicians are releasing repeat, violent gun offenders over and over again no matter how many gun crimes they have.....

If the democrats stopped releasing these criminals, our gun murder and crime rates would drop 95%.......

The point still stands. If you're a drug dealer, knowing you won't go to jail (at all) for possessing drugs but (at the very least) will go to jail for a gun and would need to pay for an attorney to eventually get you out of jail. (Even if they eventually reduce the charges). Would you still carry a gun if you're a street level dealer? The smarter ones won't.

And it could likely have a snowball effect. If most of the street level dealers and users stop carrying guns, some of the other criminal elements may also not feel the need to carry a gun (to protect themselves or their "assets") since most of the street level drug crowds likely won't carry guns. There could likely be less "territorial" wars between gangs since they won't need to have blocks and sections with "lookouts" that surround them. No need for "lookouts" and segregated, heavily armed drug markets since they won't be going to jail for drugs.

Almost every country that has decriminalized drugs has seen a drop in not just gun violence but overall violent crime as well. Heavy drug use and addiction levels have also seen reduction in some countries due to the vast amount of resources dedicated to rehabilitation programs. When drug addicts in the US go to prison they can get just as many drugs in prison as they had on the outside. And many times, these drug addicts are in the same prison blocks as the more serious and violent offenders. So they tend to come out worse than when they went in - and no less addicted to drugs. Rehabilitation programs are not perfect but they are vastly better at rehabilitating drug offenders than most prisons in the US.

That said, I wouldn't be against implying tougher sentences for violent gun offenders. And most would likely get tougher sentences by default since they wouldn't have anyone to "rat out" (to get a reduced sentence) since most drug cases would be decriminalized. And once these tougher sentences get imposed, you should begin to see even less guns by street level dealers/users/etc. Decriminalization is intended to create less violence, less risk to police and would go hand in hand with harsher, violent gun offender sentencing.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Gun control is a legal, philosophical and moral issue.

For anything to happen here, all sides must operate inside certain realities.

One of those realities:
The pro-gun side has no reason to, and thus will not, accept unnecessary, ineffective, and unconstitutional restrictions on the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by the law abiding.

Anyone unwilling to live within that reality has no actual interest in addressing the issue.

 

[Donald H]

More people are killed or shot and survive, one or two at a time, than in mass murders. My point is exactly the point, where you just want to concentrate on the most shocking occasions. My answers in this thread stand a better chance of (not stopping, but) making a difference than anything put forth by the "protect our guns at all costs" crowd.

I've started a new thread on which you can air all your complaints and arguments for guns that save lives.
That discussiion doesn't call for any negativity concerning the gun murder and violence.

I say give common sense in a crowded society a chance. I have no problem regulating on the basis of criminality, who has weapons on the street, and requiring permit (with training, testing and background check prior to issue) at the same time, I have no problem with stop and frisk to take weapons out of the hands of criminals on the street, if they are not permitted to carry or own, and like I said, I have no problem with banning long guns from street carry except in purchase or going into repair facilities or ranges. I can easily live with it, as I am and always have been in compliance, just out of good common sense (having been raised with weapons, trained with weapons) and in support of good citizenship in a crowded society of law and order.

Run your suggestions past 2Aguy and 14Shooter to see if the pro-gun side are agreeable?

All you're ever going to hear from me is going to be about the culture of wars in America.

If you can't stand hearing it continuously then you're going to have to take moderator action against me to stop hearing it!

 

[martybegan]

Your signature quote....C.S. Lewis....right? Just wondering...

Yes.

 

[Donald H]

For anything to happen here, all sides must operate inside certain realities.

One of those realities:
The pro-gun side has no reason to, and thus will not, accept unnecessary, ineffective, and unconstitutional restrictions on the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by the law abiding.

Anyone unwilling to live within that reality has no actual interest in addressing the issue.

And that's the reason why I can think and live within your realities. The pro-gun side won't accept any of the above you mentioned.

The 'culture' of America's continuous wars must change. That in no way restricts anybody's 2A rights and it doesn't restrict any military style weapons or even bazookas or hand grenades! It in fact can conclude the debate and award it to the pro-gun side.

You win! You have everything you've ever asked for!

The 'culture of continuous wars and murder by gun are not your responsibility.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And that's the reason why I can think and live within your realities. The pro-gun side won't accept any of the above you mentioned.
The 'culture' of America's continuous wars must change. That in no way restricts anybody's 2A rights and it doesn't restrict any military style weapons or even bazookas or hand grenades! It in fact can conclude the debate and award it to the pro-gun side.
You win! You have everything you've ever asked for!
The 'culture of continuous wars and murder by gun are not your responsibility.

And thus:
You have no actual interest in addressing the issue.

 

[Missourian]

They've witnessed the alarming amount of gun violence...

We in the sane part of the country call that CRIME.

Address the CRIME problem.

We in the sane part of the country have MANY more guns per capita...and MUCH LESS CRIME...including shootings.

When gun grabbers can explain that... I'll start listening.

 

[Donald H]

And thus:
You have no actual interest in addressing the issue.

None of the suggestions are acceptable to us because they all infringe on 2A rights and on an American's right to choose any gun he/she wishes. He's the good guy right up until he squeezes off the first round that takes out the 5 year old, right between the eyes!

The only suggestion to survive is mine and nobody wants to talk about it.

So I guess you're right Shooter, nobody gives a fk

 

[White 6]

I've started a new thread on which you can air all your complaints and arguments for guns that save lives.
That discussiion doesn't call for any negativity concerning the gun murder and violence.

Run your suggestions past 2Aguy and 14Shooter to see if the pro-gun side are agreeable?

All you're ever going to hear from me is going to be about the culture of wars in America.

If you can't stand hearing it continuously then you're going to have to take moderator action against me to stop hearing it!

The "All the guns for all the people, all the time" will never agree, but most are actually law-abiding and responsible in their ownership, if not their rhetoric. At least, I think they are.

 

[Votto]

We in the sane part of the country call that CRIME.

Address the CRIME problem.

We in the sane part of the country have MANY more guns per capita...and MUCH LESS CRIME...including shootings.

When gun grabbers can explain that... I'll start listening.

The NRA has existed since the 1870's.

Now, all of a sudden, they are the problem?

 

[M14 Shooter]

None of the suggestions are acceptable to us because they all infringe on 2A rights and on an American's right to choose any gun he/she wishes. He's the good guy right up until he squeezes off the first round that takes out the 5 year old, right between the eyes!

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate you have no actual interest in addressing the issue.
I am sure you will continue to do so.

 

[Donald H]

The "All the guns for all the people, all the time" will never agree, but most are actually law-abiding and responsible in their ownership, if not their rhetoric. At least, I think they are.

I think you're right that most are law-abiding.

But what's in the heads of those who choose an AR-15?
Can your be completely honest and tell me what's in your head that caused you to buy one?

I've been a gun owner and an avid shooter to the level that would match your experience and that of most others on this board. So I know what is in the heads of those who choose the black military lookalike.

So don't give me any fkn bullsh-t White. How about an argument that says there are valid reasons to justify it? Here's a couple of suggestions:

1. You all need equal firepower as government for reasons you could specify.

2. You're all going to need experience with the weapon because of the chance of war on American soil.

3. .................................

I'm doing everything I can to expand the conversation and take it to a new and different level. The reason being, we've heard all the bullsh-t a hundred times over and it didn't work.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I think you're right that most are law-abiding.
But what's in the heads of those who choose an AR-15?
Can your be completely honest and tell me what's in your head that caused you to buy one?

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate you have no actual interest in addressing the issue.
I am sure you will continue to do so.

 

[Ace Nova]

Why do you believe background checks on private sales will help? Considering the current mandated Federal background checks are ignored by criminals who use straw buyers, who can pass any background check, or they steal their guns....

How is a background check on private sales not simply another way to put normal, law abiding gun owners in legal peril while doing nothing to stop criminals....?

Then, explain why universal background checks are not simply a trojan horse for gun registration....

We will wait for your reply.

Where do you think almost ALL of the "illegal" guns circulating in the U.S. came from? That's right: They started off as "Legal" guns. Like you said, most from straw purchases, many from "shady" legal dealers, others from "private sale dealers" and a small % stolen.

frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS

www.pbs.org

Background checks won't eliminate the illegal gun trade but they do make it (at least slightly) more difficult for a violent offender to obtain one. Mostly "career criminals" buy illegal guns. But if you're an everyday Joe, convicted of a felony years ago but bettered yourself, you're not going to buy an illegal gun.

Gun registration, on the other hand, could help reduce the illegal gun trade. It certainly would clear out many of the "shady dealers" and "shady private dealers". Could also help reduce straw purchases since the person buying the gun would be responsible for the weapon. He would (at the very least) need to report the gun lost or stolen and shave off the serial number in order to re-sell it. Many states already have gun registration laws in place.

Why would a responsible, law abiding citizen be against gun registration? I would think the only ones that would be against it would be "shady dealers", criminals, and terrorists, no?

If you own a car, motorcycle, or a boat you need to register it. If you own a house or property, you register it. You need to register to vote in most states. You need a drivers license, which is registered with the state to drive a car. In states that medical marijuana is legal, you need to register with the state for an medical marijuana ID. If you hope to collect social security when you retire, your social security number and benefits are registered.

Why would there be an issue with registering guns?

Wouldn't gun registration help solve criminal cases? If a gun is registered, the police could potentially track the gun and solve the case. The same way the police track down hit and run drivers, etc (By tracking down the license plate).

Wouldn't it also help track down illegal guns? The ballistic "fingerprint" registered with the state would follow the gun for life, even if the serial number is scratched off. And yes, there are ways to file a gun's ballistics but it's not as easy as filing off a serial number nor can it be done with all guns. At the very least, the criminal would know that the gun was registered at some point and could potentially be tracked down. That alone should make at least some criminals think twice.

 

[Donald H]

Where do you think almost ALL of the "illegal" guns circulating in the U.S. came from? That's right: They started off as "Legal" guns. Like you said, most from straw purchases, many from "shady" legal dealers, others from "private sale dealers" and a small % stolen.

frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS

www.pbs.org

Background checks won't eliminate the illegal gun trade but they do make it (at least slightly) more difficult for a violent offender to obtain one. Mostly "career criminals" buy illegal guns. But if you're an everyday Joe, convicted of a felony years ago but bettered yourself, you're not going to buy an illegal gun.

Gun registration, on the other hand, could help reduce the illegal gun trade. It certainly would clear out many of the "shady dealers" and "shady private dealers". Could also help reduce straw purchases since the person buying the gun would be responsible for the weapon. He would (at the very least) need to report the gun lost or stolen and shave off the serial number in order to re-sell it. Many states already have gun registration laws in place.

Why would a responsible, law abiding citizen be against gun registration? I would think the only ones that would be against it would be "shady dealers", criminals, and terrorists, no?

If you own a car, motorcycle, or a boat you need to register it. If you own a house or property, you register it. You need to register to vote in most states. You need a drivers license, which is registered with the state to drive a car. In states that medical marijuana is legal, you need to register with the state for an medical marijuana ID. If you hope to collect social security when you retire, your social security number and benefits are registered.

Why would there be an issue with registering guns?

Wouldn't gun registration help solve criminal cases? If a gun is registered, the police could potentially track the gun and solve the case. The same way the police track down hit and run drivers, etc (By tracking down the license plate).

Wouldn't it also help track down illegal guns? The ballistic "fingerprint" registered with the state would follow the gun for life, even if the serial number is scratched off. And yes, there are ways to file a gun's ballistics but it's not as easy as filing off a serial number nor can it be done with all guns. At the very least, the criminal would know that the gun was registered at some point and could potentially be tracked down. That alone should make at least some criminals think twice.

Hey Ace, no gun control can do any good. And besides the next mass shooter isn't going to give a fk if the gun is traced to his dead body.

2A and 14Shooter are finally right. Gun control is impossible and it's all bullshit gungrabbing by the commies/nazi/government.

 

[2aguy]

Where do you think almost ALL of the "illegal" guns circulating in the U.S. came from? That's right: They started off as "Legal" guns. Like you said, most from straw purchases, many from "shady" legal dealers, others from "private sale dealers" and a small % stolen.

frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS

www.pbs.org

Background checks won't eliminate the illegal gun trade but they do make it (at least slightly) more difficult for a violent offender to obtain one. Mostly "career criminals" buy illegal guns. But if you're an everyday Joe, convicted of a felony years ago but bettered yourself, you're not going to buy an illegal gun.

Gun registration, on the other hand, could help reduce the illegal gun trade. It certainly would clear out many of the "shady dealers" and "shady private dealers". Could also help reduce straw purchases since the person buying the gun would be responsible for the weapon. He would (at the very least) need to report the gun lost or stolen and shave off the serial number in order to re-sell it. Many states already have gun registration laws in place.

Why would a responsible, law abiding citizen be against gun registration? I would think the only ones that would be against it would be "shady dealers", criminals, and terrorists, no?

If you own a car, motorcycle, or a boat you need to register it. If you own a house or property, you register it. You need to register to vote in most states. You need a drivers license, which is registered with the state to drive a car. In states that medical marijuana is legal, you need to register with the state for an medical marijuana ID. If you hope to collect social security when you retire, your social security number and benefits are registered.

Why would there be an issue with registering guns?

Wouldn't gun registration help solve criminal cases? If a gun is registered, the police could potentially track the gun and solve the case. The same way the police track down hit and run drivers, etc (By tracking down the license plate).

Wouldn't it also help track down illegal guns? The ballistic "fingerprint" registered with the state would follow the gun for life, even if the serial number is scratched off. And yes, there are ways to file a gun's ballistics but it's not as easy as filing off a serial number nor can it be done with all guns. At the very least, the criminal would know that the gun was registered at some point and could potentially be tracked down. That alone should make at least some criminals think twice.

And there we have it.....

The "guns started out as legal...." silliness....

Here is one that you guys don't want to answer....

The only reason we have rape in our country is women are allowed to walk around unchaperoned by men, and wear provocative clothing....

So, according to your logic,......

If we want to reduce rape, we should do what muslim countries do, not allow women out without male family members, and force them to wear coverings...

Do you know that criminals do not have to register their illegal guns? Per Haynes v United States......

Do you know that gun registration does not help solve crimes?

If a gun is stolen...then registration doesn't help......and most cases are solved by following relationships of the victim, not tracking the gun that is rarely left at the scene, or if it is, comes back stolen....often years before....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Where do you think almost ALL of the "illegal" guns circulating in the U.S. came from? That's right: They started off as "Legal" guns. Like you said, most from straw purchases, many from "shady" legal dealers, others from "private sale dealers" and a small % stolen.

All of this is illegal. Laws will not prevent these things.

Background checks won't eliminate the illegal gun trade but they do make it (at least slightly) more difficult for a violent offender to obtain one.

Background checks are unnecessary, ineffective, and violate the constitution.
Why should the pro-gun side accept this restriction?

Why would a responsible, law abiding citizen be against gun registration?

Universal gun registration is unnecessary, ineffective, and violates the constitution.
Why should the pro-gun side accept this restriction?

Why would there be an issue with registering guns?

Universal gun registration is unnecessary, ineffective, and violates the constitution.
Why should the pro-gun side accept this restriction?

Why do you refuse to proceed within the reality that the pro-gun side will not accept unnecessary and ineffective restrictions that violates the constitution?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Hey Ace, no gun control can do any good. And besides the next mass shooter isn't going to give a fk if the gun is traced to his dead body.

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate you have no actual interest in addressing the issue.
I am sure you will further continue to do so.

 

[Ace Nova]

And there we have it.....

The "guns started out as legal...." silliness....

Here is one that you guys don't want to answer....

The only reason we have rape in our country is women are allowed to walk around unchaperoned by men, and wear provocative clothing....

So, according to your logic,......

If we want to reduce rape, we should do what muslim countries do, not allow women out without male family members, and force them to wear coverings...

Do you know that criminals do not have to register their illegal guns? Per Haynes v United States......

Do you know that gun registration does not help solve crimes?

If a gun is stolen...then registration doesn't help......and most cases are solved by following relationships of the victim, not tracking the gun that is rarely left at the scene, or if it is, comes back stolen....often years before....

Errr...if we want to reduce rape, we register the convicted rapist as a sex offender.

Obviously, criminals don't register their guns but it doesn't matter because it would have already been registered at the time of original purchase.

And if you require ballistic testing of all registered guns - guess what? The police won't need to have the gun in order to trace it back to it's original owner. They would be able to trace it back by both the bullet and spent shell casing. Amazing, right?