Days Since Last Shooting II

[SJHovey]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

But. Where I just lived for more than a decade owning a gun is normal, and more importantly it's a rite of passage to male working class adulthood and a keystone of a very aggressive, highly paranoid cultural identity. You may as well tell people they can't drive their own cars anymore.

Most gun owners also tend to be rabidly pro-police, pro- "law and order", so I suggest one step: if you commit a violent crime while carrying a gun you get ten years slapped onto your sentence, mandatory, no appeal.

I can't speak for everyone, but having grown up in North Dakota I certainly came from a pro-gun culture. To me the presence of a gun in the house was basically the same as the presence of a coffee maker or toaster. I was more surprised when it wasn't there than when it was.

But I think you miss the mark regarding your surmise that there was some sort of paranoia or "aggressive" aspect to it. It was, as you note, a right of passage. It's the way that fathers and sons spent their Saturday afternoons together. My father didn't have the ability to take my brother or me from Long Island to a Mets game on a Saturday in September. We weren't going to drive 600 miles to see the Twins play. We would drive 5 miles out of town and spend the day following our dogs through the prairie grass in search of sharptail grouse.

That culture still exists. It's not as large as it once was, but it's big enough, and covers enough of the political votes in this country to make it very, very difficult to just declare as a society that we should do away with private ownership of guns. And candidly, that's really the only solution. We can add 10 years to every gun crime sentence, but we've tried sentencing our way out of problems before and it never works. We can try the "feel good" solutions by banning guns that look scary but are no different than other guns, by imposing waiting periods, by requiring registration, etc... But we all know those solutions won't solve problems like Las Vegas. You're telling me some Las Vegas bean counter who used to work for the IRS wouldn't qualify for a gun if he had to wait? This guy bought guns over a span of months. He had all the time in the world and no history of problems.

No, the only solution is a complete ban, and that is impossible here, at least right now. This ain't Australia. Even if the 2nd Amendment didn't exist I don't see you getting it done. Sitting here whining about it, as many other posters have done, does nothing.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I can't speak for everyone, but having grown up in North Dakota I certainly came from a pro-gun culture. To me the presence of a gun in the house was basically the same as the presence of a coffee maker or toaster. I was more surprised when it wasn't there than when it was.

But I think you miss the mark regarding your surmise that there was some sort of paranoia or "aggressive" aspect to it. It was, as you note, a right of passage. It's the way that fathers and sons spent their Saturday afternoons together. My father didn't have the ability to take my brother or me from Long Island to a Mets game on a Saturday in September. We weren't going to drive 600 miles to see the Twins play. We would drive 5 miles out of town and spend the day following our dogs through the prairie grass in search of sharptail grouse.

That culture still exists. It's not as large as it once was, but it's big enough, and covers enough of the political votes in this country to make it very, very difficult to just declare as a society that we should do away with private ownership of guns. And candidly, that's really the only solution. We can add 10 years to every gun crime sentence, but we've tried sentencing our way out of problems before and it never works. We can try the "feel good" solutions by banning guns that look scary but are no different than other guns, by imposing waiting periods, by requiring registration, etc... But we all know those solutions won't solve problems like Las Vegas. You're telling me some Las Vegas bean counter who used to work for the IRS wouldn't qualify for a gun if he had to wait? This guy bought guns over a span of months. He had all the time in the world and no history of problems.

No, the only solution is a complete ban, and that is impossible here, at least right now. This ain't Australia. Even if the 2nd Amendment didn't exist I don't see you getting it done. Sitting here whining about it, as many other posters have done, does nothing.

Just as dismissing Brent as "not thinking" is not constructive, so is dismissing the side who wants there to be change as "whining."

I've literally fired one hand gun and two rifles so I know nothing. Let me ask a naive question. Isn't there a bright line between guns that have another bullet waiting to be reloaded, either automatically or with a bolt, and guns which have only one bullet physically available to the gun, and which require the next bullet being manually drawn from a supply not physical connected to the gun?

I think that is a good place to draw the line of legality. Give hunters one shot. That preserves the hunting culture.

I recognize that this doesn't answer the requirement for home protection. In that case, how about a law where you can possess and use anything you want inside your home (subject to the property owner's approval), but only inside your home, including firing a bullet that leaves your premises.

Background checks, waiting periods, and registration are still all good ideas, in any case.

I think all of the above would go a long way towards safety without interfering with the legitimate rights people are trying to protect.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

...if you commit a violent crime while carrying a gun you get ten years slapped onto your sentence, mandatory, no appeal.

I'd be okay with that. Also, if one of your kids finds your gun laying around (and not locked up in a gun safe), and happens to kill his/her sibling, the owner should be charged with accessory to murder along with all the other bells and whistles. That should help change some attitudes towards guns and being responsible about them.

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Sitting here whining about it, as many other posters have done, does nothing.

You should probably just stop posting forever then.

so I suggest one step: if you commit a violent crime while carrying a gun you get ten years slapped onto your sentence, mandatory, no appeal.

I think we all know this doesn't work though and is just adding to the incarceration/slave labor in private prisons issue. That and mandatory minimums are just a terrible idea in general.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Just as dismissing Brent as "not thinking" is not constructive, so is dismissing the side who wants there to be change as "whining."

I've literally fired one hand gun and two rifles so I know nothing. Let me ask a naive question. Isn't there a bright line between guns that have another bullet waiting to be reloaded, either automatically or with a bolt, and guns which have only one bullet physically available to the gun, and which require the next bullet being manually drawn from a supply not physical connected to the gun?

I think that is a good place to draw the line of legality. Give hunters one shot. That preserves the hunting culture.

I recognize that this doesn't answer the requirement for home protection. In that case, how about a law where you can possess and use anything you want inside your home (subject to the property owner's approval), but only inside your home, including firing a bullet that leaves your premises.

Background checks, waiting periods, and registration are still all good ideas, in any case.

I think all of the above would go a long way towards safety without interfering with the legitimate rights people are trying to protect.

I wrote my sentence poorly. I didn't think you were whining. That's why I added the "as many other posters have done" phrase, but I'll admit it could have been read to include you. That was not my intent. But other posters have come in here, shrieking and whining, with no solutions posed, and I don't think that's helpful. In fact, it's part of the reason for polarization on the issue.

As for your question, they do actually make weapons with only a single shot available, although at least from my experience they are extremely rare. I've only seen one, and it was my grandfather's .410 shotgun, but I'm sure others exist. If you banned everything else, you might as well go with the total ban. I'm guessing huge sections of the public don't even have my limited experience with a single shot gun.

To my way of thinking, the most practical solution is two-fold. First, I'd impose some sort of liability on persons who own a gun but permit, either intentionally or unintentionally, it's use in a crime.

Second, I'd do what we did with smoking. I'd tax the he!! out of it. We didn't see a big reduction in smoking because it was bad for you or because we sued people. A lot of people quit because they simply couldn't afford it. Big taxes on guns, ammo and the materials used to make ammo (since many are making their own) will go a long way towards reducing gun purchases and usage in this country. That, coupled with the general decline in hunting, will ultimately change the gun culture. It just won't be in our lifetime.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I wrote my sentence poorly. I didn't think you were whining. That's why I added the "as many other posters have done" phrase, but I'll admit it could have been read to include you. That was not my intent. But other posters have come in here, shrieking and whining, with no solutions posed, and I don't think that's helpful. In fact, it's part of the reason for polarization on the issue.

I was defending the other posters. I'm arrogant enough to assume you weren't talking about me.

I like the idea of taxing it, but it doesn't make it any easier, in fact it might be harder. "The power to tax is the power is destroy" is one of the great misapplied righty thought-terminating cliches, and the NRA henchmen on the Court love to spout it.

But we don't have to pick one strategy. Banning where appropriate, like with rocket launchers. Taxing where possible, as with other sin taxes. Shaming, as with domestic violence. Regulating the death merchants, as with cigarettes. Educating the ones who can do math. Improving the Great Unwashed so they do other things with their lives besides hur hur shootin'.

There are lots of ways to counter long term cultural programming and save a lot of lives.

 

[Drew S.]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

So apparently cops didn't go into the room of the Las Vegas shooter for an hour after he started shooting. Thank god he stopped or obviously the death toll would have been significantly higher. I wondered how on earth a swat team would have got to his room in 10 minutes.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

A good guy with a gun.

 

[dave122793]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I think we all know this doesn't work though and is just adding to the incarceration/slave labor in private prisons issue. That and mandatory minimums are just a terrible idea in general.

In general, I would agree that mandatory minimums are a bad idea. But when it comes to violent crimes committed with a gun I think that's a different story. If you've committed that type of crime you've shown that you're currently not able to function normally in our society and you need some hard time to think about whether or not you ever will be. And if we do let you back into society and you are caught with a gun again, next time you get 20 years to think about it. I also think if you shoot somebody and they live, your attempted murder sentence should greatly approach what you would've got if the victim died. You shouldn't get a break just because you're a lousy shot or your victim was lucky enough to get medical attention quickly.

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

In general, I would agree that mandatory minimums are a bad idea. But when it comes to violent crimes committed with a gun I think that's a different story. If you've committed that type of crime you've shown that you're currently not able to function normally in our society and you need some hard time to think about whether or not you ever will be. And if we do let you back into society and you are caught with a gun again, next time you get 20 years to think about it. I also think if you shoot somebody and they live, your attempted murder sentence should greatly approach what you would've got if the victim died. You shouldn't get a break just because you're a lousy shot or your victim was lucky enough to get medical attention quickly.

Problem is, especially in poor communities, you're talking about brainwashed kids in gangs being charged as adults and basically getting the book thrown at them as well as being given no chance to reintegrate into society once they serve their time. And this isn't even getting into how various political policies has basically caused/exacerbated all of this.

That said by the time someone commits one of these acts it's far too late anyhow, you're probably not gonna change their views (just think of how hard it is to change someone's political views regardless of how many facts are presented). So I see your point, there has to be some kind of punishment there but it still seems like the kind of regressive thing we need to get rid of. Especially the mandatory minimum part.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I would think the language of such a law would be very specific (including the age of the accused) and a certain level of violent crime. Simple assault (like me punching you a couple times) wouldn't cut it.

Anyway, it's a basic idea, which is what we are all trying to start the discussion with.

 

[joecct]

I would think the language of such a law would be very specific (including the age of the accused) and a certain level of violent crime. Simple assault (like me punching you a couple times) wouldn't cut it.

Anyway, it's a basic idea, which is what we are all trying to start the discussion with.

But there will numb nuts who believe that if you punch me in the nose, I can ventilate you with my 9mm Glock.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

But there will numb nuts who believe that if you punch me in the nose, I can ventilate you with my 9mm Glock.

That's already law. Stand your ground.

 

[BassAle]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I like the idea of requiring a permit to own a gun and severe penalties for possessing an unpermitted firearm, and any conviction of a felony = lifetime ban. Also ban certain types of weapons (anything but bolt action hunting rifles, shotguns, and some hand guns would be banned. Hand guns are probably the most commonly used in crimes and kids accidentally shooting themselves or a family member. They would require extensive background checks, safety certification, liability insurance, and must be secured (locked) and unloaded for transportation outside the home.

Of course existing non compliant guns are out there and there would need to be some kind of buyback/confiscation. Blackmarket / unregistered guns recovered during criminal investigations would be destroyed. You get convicted of a felony all your guns get destroyed. It may take us 100 years but eventually we will have a more reasonable number of guns.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

But there will numb nuts who believe that if you punch me in the nose, I can ventilate you with my 9mm Glock.

And there's the change in attitude that is needed, IMO. That's the attitude that no laws can really fix.

 

[jerphisch]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

And there's the change in attitude that is needed, IMO. That's the attitude that no laws can really fix.

If the law says guns aren't so ****ing awesome maybe the attitude will follow. Worst case is you're right and nothing changes, best case is it does change something. But totally not worth trying since it might not work, right?

 

[The Rube]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

If the law says guns aren't so ****ing awesome maybe the attitude will follow. Worst case is you're right and nothing changes, best case is it does change something. But totally not worth trying since it might not work, right?

I didn't say that. Now you're starting to sound like alfablue.

I've suggested/agreed with 2-3 changes, minimum in this very thread. But they are not necessarily the answers you want to hear, so you spout off basically saying "you're doing nothing."

 

[jerphisch]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I didn't say that. Now you're starting to sound like alfablue.

I've suggested/agreed with 2-3 changes, minimum in this very thread. But they are not necessarily the answers you want to hear, so you spout off basically saying "you're doing nothing."

Maybe you just need to think before you type then. You literally just said this:

And there's the change in attitude that is needed, IMO. That's the attitude that no laws can really fix.

Which is specifically what my response was to. You said laws can't fix the attitude, and I responded specifically to that post, which is why I chose to quote it. Is the internet really that hard? I feel like this is a pretty simple concept. You feel like laws can't change the attitude, my response was that I don't know that to be true. As the laws have gotten more and more relaxed recently the attitude seems to have followed. It is a little chicken and egg, but the are certainly related. So why not start with changing laws and hope the attitude follows?

 

[The Rube]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

1. The attitude towards guns is the million dollar answer.
2. I think the dual-approval mental health check-off by un-affiliated doctors would help a bit. That doesn't really limit gun purchases or guns available. It limits the people who can purchase them.
3. I will definitely listen to stronger sentences for those who break the current laws.
4. People complain about the mods that make guns illegal. While I don't like the mods, one can still buy all the materials to build a bomb, too. Haven't made those illegal. (yes, it is tougher to buy in bulk)
5. Banning this or that, or suggesting buy-backs at this point is going to be fruitless. I really honestly think there are too many guns out there to even think that is feasible.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

But other posters have come in here, shrieking and whining, with no solutions posed, and I don't think that's helpful. In fact, it's part of the reason for polarization on the issue.

A very small part.

If you were posting here a decade ago you'd know, gun control facts and solutions have been posted here for a long time and gun supporters have rarely engaged or looked for solutions. There wasn't nearly the support for gun control solutions here a decade ago and many gun supporters really couldn't defend themselves then either...when they ran out of talking points, they often resorted to jokes about drive by shootings. And while I don't see many jokes about shootings any more, those posters are also not joining the discussion now either. I suspect you underestimate the size of this crowd.