Have you offered any solutions?
Ross Douthat: A simple, practical way to keep guns from young men who shouldn’t have them (msn.com)So I would like to see experiments with age-based impediments rather than full restrictions — allowing would-be gun purchasers 25 and under the same rights of ownership as 40- or 60-year-olds, but with more substantial screenings before a purchase. Not just a criminal-background check, in other words, but some kind of basic social or psychological screening, combining a mental-health check, a social-media audit and testimonials from two competent adults — all subject to the same appeals process as a well-designed red-flag law.
Raising the age to 21 for all guns and red flag laws are a good start. I would also like to see psych screenings for anyone getting a gun license. The Uvalde and Buffalo shooter would have been ID'ed by that type of screening.I have in other similar threads. More focus on mental health, and persnal firearms safety and responsibility training.
Just read this opinion piece, and I like his thoughts on this:
Ross Douthat: A simple, practical way to keep guns from young men who shouldn’t have them (msn.com)
Raising the age to 21 for all guns and red flag laws are a good start. I would also like to see psych screenings for anyone getting a gun license. The Uvalde and Buffalo shooter would have been ID'ed by that type of screening.
The mentally ill or people with anger issues should not have guns. Republicans have never done anything to separate the mental ill from guns.
We need universal background checks for ALL gun transfers. Gift or sale.
It needs to be more then diagnosed mental illness. People who settle disputes with physical violence should not be granted a license. Psych screenings would catch that.Possession of Firearms by People With Mental Illness (ncsl.org)
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”
Most states also have their own laws.
Regardless of your flawed argument in selling it, the Assault Weapons Ban is symbolic rather than practical.
You keep saying that, yet I showed you the chart showing gun deaths going down after the '94 assault weapons ban
I've yammered about this on more than one conversation on this forum. Any time you start probing into the intent of the individual, arguments tend to spiral off into wild directions. Is it to protect children from being shot? Better ways to do that. Protect them from dying? Better ways to do that. Protect them from fear? Better ways to do that. Fighting the 2A has, historically, been a waste of time.The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.
Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.
Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.THREE PERCENT
Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.
And yet they are an outlier when it comes to which firearms are used in mass shootings (or at least the school variety).The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.
Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.
Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.THREE PERCENT
Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.
Seems like you are arguing for a full ban. "Well, if you take my ARs, I'll just use my semi-auto handgun. Checkmate libs."I've yammered about this on more than one conversation on this forum. Any time you start probing into the intent of the individual, arguments tend to spiral off into wild directions. Is it to protect children from being shot? Better ways to do that. Protect them from dying? Better ways to do that. Protect them from fear? Better ways to do that. Fighting the 2A has, historically, been a waste of time.
Maybe things will change, but I doubt it.
Yes, but it’s also a great example of why we can’t have a meaningful discussion about guns because suddenly we are fighting over technicalities and not dealing with the larger problem of how lose as many people every day to gun violence as Ukraine does in a full on war with Russia.And yet they are an outlier when it comes to which firearms are used in mass shootings (or at least the school variety).
Which suggests there are two different mechanisms at play when it comes to which firearms are being used for which types of homicide.
30k plus Americans a year has been deemed an acceptable cost.Seems like you are arguing for a full ban. "Well, if you take my ARs, I'll just use my semi-auto handgun. Checkmate libs."
Right, wrong, or indifferent there is a difference in a school being shot up and gang killings or DV killings. Although waiting periods, better and universal background checks, and red flag laws would also help with DV killings.
But go ahead and tell us how to do all of those things for kids better, without any new gun control. I'm guessing it'll be similar to the guy that claimed I wasn't thinking right about "school hardening" then never came back to explain. I'm guessing it just comes down to you think a hundred school kids a year is an acceptable cost.
The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.
Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.
Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.THREE PERCENT
Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.
Raising the age to 21 for all guns and red flag laws are a good start. I would also like to see psych screenings for anyone getting a gun license. The Uvalde and Buffalo shooter would have been ID'ed by that type of screening.
The mentally ill or people with anger issues should not have guns. Republicans have never done anything to separate the mental ill from guns.
We need universal background checks for ALL gun transfers. Gift or sale.
While mental screening sounds like a good idea, I’m guessing that in practice it would be about as effective as some states and their “training requirements” which are a complete joke.
I have a great idea on how to get started. People should be able to turn in dash cam videos of idiots using their vehicles as weapons. These jerks are brake checking, stopping in the middle of the road and getting out of their cars to fight someone and swerving towards others. These people don't have the temperament to drive and shouldn't be permitted to own or drive a car, let alone own a firearm.It needs to be more then diagnosed mental illness. People who settle disputes with physical violence should not be granted a license. Psych screenings would catch that.
As part of a background check association with groups know for crime and violence don't get guns. (Proud Boys, Hells Angels) as examples
It may be hard to accept, but we consider a hundred school-aged kids a year as an acceptable cost for all sorts of things.Seems like you are arguing for a full ban. "Well, if you take my ARs, I'll just use my semi-auto handgun. Checkmate libs."
Right, wrong, or indifferent there is a difference in a school being shot up and gang killings or DV killings. Although waiting periods, better and universal background checks, and red flag laws would also help with DV killings.
But go ahead and tell us how to do all of those things for kids better, without any new gun control. I'm guessing it'll be similar to the guy that claimed I wasn't thinking right about "school hardening" then never came back to explain. I'm guessing it just comes down to you think a hundred school kids a year is an acceptable cost.
such as...?It may be hard to accept, but we consider a hundred school-aged kids a year as an acceptable cost for all sorts of things.
Generally more important things than making 18 year old incels feel like they don't have a micro penis.It may be hard to accept, but we consider a hundred school-aged kids a year as an acceptable cost for all sorts of things.
Not gonna go listing all the ways in which children die in this country that don't get the same attention, because it's not necessary, we already know them. I agree with you, terrorism is fucked up. We had a whole goddamned war on it though and it's only gotten worse. My point remains, there's a lot of ways people, children included, die that we accept as a part of modern society. It'll only get worse as time goes on, because things are only going to be getting worse on this planet. I just want people to be honest with themselves and others as to what they want. Don't say you want to protect children, because there's more ways that children die than banning guns will resolve. Don't say you want to protect children from guns if your only concern is school shootings, because the vast majority of children die from guns outside of school shootings. Don't say you want to protect 'children' from terrorism if you aren't going to pick up a rifle, head to Ukraine, and start shooting orcs, because there's a lot more children suffering from terrorism over there than here, on our glass houses on our shining hill.such as...?
and which one of those things have the same effects as stochastic terrorism in the form of mass-shootings?
make me benevolent dictator of the USA for the rest of my life and i'll be happy to ban all semi-automatic firearms, legalize recreational drugs, provide money for drug abuse prevention and addiction recovery instead of law enforcement, invest hundreds of billions into our black communities that have been purposefully ignored for nearly a century (more than that really..but let's go with post-WW2), and incentivize domestic manufacturing including clean energy initiatives.Not gonna go listing all the ways in which children die in this country that don't get the same attention, because it's not necessary, we already know them. I agree with you, terrorism is fucked up. We had a whole goddamned war on it though and it's only gotten worse. My point remains, there's a lot of ways people, children included, die that we accept as a part of modern society. It'll only get worse as time goes on, because things are only going to be getting worse on this planet. I just want people to be honest with themselves and others as to what they want. Don't say you want to protect children, because there's more ways that children die than banning guns will resolve. Don't say you want to protect children from guns if your only concern is school shootings, because the vast majority of children die from guns outside of school shootings. Don't say you want to protect 'children' from terrorism if you aren't going to pick up a rifle, head to Ukraine, and start shooting orcs, because there's a lot more children suffering from terrorism over there than here, on our glass houses on our shining hill.
Now, if you want to feel absolved for the sin of being unable to protect children in what you perceive to be your tribe, I can understand that feeling, but it may not necessarily be something within your control, and that has to be acceptable too.
Yep, often times this is how dramatic governmental changes happen... the stagnation, corruption, and paralysis of the senate gives rise to the populist 'benevolent' dictator, a la ancient Rome. We almost had that with Trump, thankfully he was incompetent.make me benevolent dictator of the USA for the rest of my life and i'll be happy to ban all semi-automatic firearms, legalize recreational drugs, provide money for drug abuse prevention and addiction recovery instead of law enforcement, invest hundreds of billions into our black communities that have been purposefully ignored for nearly a century (more than that really..but let's go with post-WW2), and incentivize domestic manufacturing including clean energy initiatives.
over 40 years (my average remaining lifespan), i can almost guarantee you that would result in a lot of change for the positive. but this is a democratic republic (...sort of), so no dictatorship for me.
i'm not sure why you think i'm only concerned about "my tribe". we can walk and chew bubblegum - we can support our allies overseas AND address domestic issues as well. 50% of congress simply doesn't want to.
I'm sure you feel that we should just completely ignore other forms of terrorism too, right?Yep, often times this is how dramatic governmental changes happen... the stagnation, corruption, and paralysis of the senate gives rise to the populist 'benevolent' dictator, a la ancient Rome. We almost had that with Trump, thankfully he was incompetent.
'We' (as in the US Govt) can yes, individuals not as much. My point of that rambling was that the individual calls for change when A Thing affects them personally, but they're usually lying to themselves as to what they want. The actual definition of what people are asking for is 'I want children in the US to not die from things we generally consider to be random terroristic activities' which is a super narrow and fairly useless ideal to glom on to. What they really want is to not feel useless in a society that they increasingly feel useless in, whether that feeling is legitimate or not.