What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Days Since Last Shooting II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

I understand and empathize with the gun control response to this incident and others like it. It's terribly frustrating to feel there's no answer and more gun restrictions might at least help.

One of the questions that always comes into my mind is, was this a mass shooting, or a mass killing? If you follow me there. The ones off the top of my head mostly seem to be the result of a lot of premeditation and planning, not just some loon that decides in five minutes this is what he's going to do, so I tend to think of it as the latter.
 
BassAle said:
I'd have the gun purchase process include required safety training, statement of need, criminal background check, and psychological evaluation. Hand guns would be more difficult to purchase than hunting rifles.

Mandatory registration, no ammo purchase without matching registration. Limits on ammo purchases (tracked in a database like cold medicine purchases).

Mandatory buyback and destruction of assault rifles.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't personally be a fan of these, but they are very well thought out and I think they would be reasonably effective(at least compared to some of the other nonsense that gets proposed.)

How would you pay for the buyback and would you pay fair value for the guns?
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Wisko McBadgerton said:
I understand and empathize with the gun control response to this incident and others like it. It's terribly frustrating to feel there's no answer and more gun restrictions might at least help.

One of the questions that always comes into my mind is, was this a mass shooting, or a mass killing? If you follow me there. The ones off the top of my head mostly seem to be the result of a lot of premeditation and planning, not just some loon that decides in five minutes this is what he's going to do, so I tend to think of it as the latter.
Click to expand...

A professor of criminology on the TV this morning I think correctly pointed out that you're not going to prevent the next one of these mass killings. They're too difficult to prevent. However, he did say that if we do things around mental illness and guns it will mitigate a lot of the smaller stuff that we don't necessarily see in the news but does impact people's lives every day. I think that's a worthwhile endeavor.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Drew S. said:
I wouldn't personally be a fan of these, but they are very well thought out and I think they would be reasonably effective(at least compared to some of the other nonsense that gets proposed.)

How would you pay for the buyback and would you pay fair value for the guns?
Click to expand...

I'd pay for it the way everything gets paid for these days -- deficit spending ;P

honestly, I don't know. I do know if I were supreme dictator I'd cut the military budget in half (at least) and I'd raise taxes on the upper income brackets and inheritance.

The guns would no longer have market value because they can't be sold (they'd have value on the black market), but I would envision a buyback at well below what the retail price of the gun was prior to the ban.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

How does society stop a mass murderer from committing mass murder?

If you limit guns, he'll use a truck.
If you limit trucks, he'll use explosives.
If you limit explosives, he'll use chemicals.

A terrorist is going to try to commit mass murder no matter what. You can't reason with a fanatic. But fortunately there frequently are tells that may tip off law enforcement to stop the terrorist in time. One would think that having an arsenal at your house should solicit a friendly visit from the cops to see what the heck is going on.

Apparently (and unfortunately) it does not.

But how can anyone stop John Q. Public who wakes up one morning and snaps & commits mass murder?
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

joecct said:
But how can anyone stop John Q. Public who wakes up one morning and snaps & commits mass murder?
Click to expand...

See my post below. You can't. But there's a lot of pain and suffering on the margins that could be prevented that isn't. That's where the benefits are.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Drew S. said:
I most definitely wouldn't be in favor of that. They should never be able to outgun private citizens.
Click to expand...

I'm reminded of what I observed in London -- lots of cops walking the beat didn't have guns at all. In areas that needed extra security some specially trained officers had machine guns, which private citizens wouldn't have access too.

Does someone giving a traffic ticket really need a gun? I live in a national park town, the "LO" (law enforcement) rangers wear body armor and carry guns and tasers. Usually all they are doing is giving out warnings for illegal parking or under age drinking/smoking pot in the campgrounds. (I think the body armor requirement happened after a couple rangers at Mount Ranier were killed by a nut job with a gun that decided to go on a rampage.) Most cops only draw and shoot their gun at a firing range.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

joecct said:
One would think that having an arsenal at your house should solicit a friendly visit from the cops to see what the heck is going on.

Apparently (and unfortunately) it does not.
Click to expand...

there is nothing in the law that says I can't buy as many guns as I want. it's my constitutional right.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

BassAle said:
Does someone giving a traffic ticket really need a gun?
Click to expand...


Are you serious?

Of course they do. If for nothing else than deterrence.


Officers have no idea who they've pulled over or who else may be in the vehicle or what else may be in the vehicle.
 
BassAle said:
I'm reminded of what I observed in London -- lots of cops walking the beat didn't have guns at all. In areas that needed extra security some specially trained officers had machine guns, which private citizens wouldn't have access too.

Does someone giving a traffic ticket really need a gun? I live in a national park town, the "LO" (law enforcement) rangers wear body armor and carry guns and tasers. Usually all they are doing is giving out warnings for illegal parking or under age drinking/smoking pot in the campgrounds. (I think the body armor requirement happened after a couple rangers at Mount Ranier were killed by a nut job with a gun that decided to go on a rampage.) Most cops only draw and shoot their gun at a firing range.
Click to expand...

I think what they do in London makes a lot of sense. What we're doing here is completely insane. I read a year ago or so Ellsworth was going to spend like $10K on new AR-15's, what a complete waste of money. It sends completely the wrong message too. In a small town like that you don't need cops running around with those guns.
 
Gurtholfin said:
Are you serious?

Of course they do. If for nothing else than deterrence.


Officers have no idea who they've pulled over or who else may be in the vehicle or what else may be in the vehicle.
Click to expand...

99% of officers will retire having never drawn their weapon on duty, let alone fired it.

The myth that the traffic stop is the most dangerous activity a cop performs needs to end.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Gurtholfin said:
Are you serious?

Of course they do. If for nothing else than deterrence.


Officers have no idea who they've pulled over or who else may be in the vehicle or what else may be in the vehicle.
Click to expand...

I am serious. What incentive would a motorist have to kill a cop armed with nothing more than a traffic ticket and a can of mace?
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Wisko McBadgerton said:
In regards to how police are armed, a real escalation in police armament was in response to this incident in 1986 as well as some other similar events.
Click to expand...

maybe instead of militarizing the police (and training the police to think every encounter is life or death) they should have done something about the availability of high-powered guns...
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

unofan said:
The myth that the traffic stop is the most dangerous activity a cop performs needs to end.
Click to expand...



I didn't say that.


Do you believe that officers should not have a firearm?

Would you do that job without a firearm?
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Drew S. said:
I think what they do in London makes a lot of sense. What we're doing here is completely insane. I read a year ago or so Ellsworth was going to spend like $10K on new AR-15's, what a complete waste of money. It sends completely the wrong message too. In a small town like that you don't need cops running around with those guns.
Click to expand...

yeah, it's insane
Ellsworth's AR-15s will spend most of their time collecting dust at the station, but will be taken out when some guy holds himself up in his trailer and causes an armed stand-off to commit suicide by cop
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top