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
- Thread starter The Rube
- Start date
- Status
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
I don't think mental illness created these people, but mental illness does have an affect on one's thinking, much of the time. It's not THE problem, but it CAN be PART of the problem.
I don't think mental illness created these people, but mental illness does have an affect on one's thinking, much of the time. It's not THE problem, but it CAN be PART of the problem.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Semi Auto rifles and pistols have been used for hunting for a long time, its hardly some new invention . they were being sold and used before any of us were born
Semi Auto rifles and pistols have been used for hunting for a long time, its hardly some new invention . they were being sold and used before any of us were born
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
This is true. There have always been weapons like this in many households. There have always been enough guns for every household in America have multiple weapons.
What has changed is what is being done with them more and more and more and more. It's small minded and backwards to think that simply because these weapons have always been in the hands and households of millions of Americans that the mere fact of their existence is not central to the problem today. I'm happy that mass shootings were not a common occurrence 50 years ago. But that was 50 years ago. In 2017 they are a common occurrence.
From the time alcohol and automobiles existed there have been drunk drivers and there have been drunk drivers causing death. But over the last 35 years, drunk driving fatalities have been reduced by 50% and for young drivers it has been even a more dramatic reduction, 80%. Responsible people decided there were things that could be done. Laws became tougher. They were enforced more consistently. We curtailed legal access to alcohol for some people. There were howls of protest throughout the early years of mandatory seat belt laws, like requiring someone to belt up was some sort of drastic infringement on our rights. Car manufacturers tried to push back against rules mandating they make their vehicles safer, because while I am never going to drive drunk, a drunk might run into me and my car needs to do a better job of protecting me.
But through all of that we did it. Yes, too many still die at the hands of a drunk driver. Too many die on the highways period. But if the rates were the same as they were in 1982, there would literally be tens of thousands more deaths on our highways.
Enact some common sense restrictions on firearms that serve no legitimate purpose in the hands of the average law abiding person. Limit every firearm transaction to those who hold a federal firearms license. Most importantly, once you have been convicted of a violent crime of any sort, you forfeit the right to legally possess a firearm. And yes, for those people I am talking confiscation. We already confiscate all sorts of things from people through asset forfeiture. Sometimes BEFORE they have been convicted. Violent criminals have no need to possess a firearm.
Most gun owners are ultra-responsible. The vast, vast majority will never do anything stupid or illegal with their weapons. Why are they the least bit interested in letting those who are violent or criminals hold on to their guns? Yes, I know the worst criminals out there will sometimes find a way to get their hands on a weapon, but by doing the things I and many other suggest, it will be a lot fewer. And like drunk driving, we won't prevent all criminal use of firearms. We might not even prevent every mass shooting. But maybe we prevent the next one that takes the life of someone you know.
This is true. There have always been weapons like this in many households. There have always been enough guns for every household in America have multiple weapons.
What has changed is what is being done with them more and more and more and more. It's small minded and backwards to think that simply because these weapons have always been in the hands and households of millions of Americans that the mere fact of their existence is not central to the problem today. I'm happy that mass shootings were not a common occurrence 50 years ago. But that was 50 years ago. In 2017 they are a common occurrence.
From the time alcohol and automobiles existed there have been drunk drivers and there have been drunk drivers causing death. But over the last 35 years, drunk driving fatalities have been reduced by 50% and for young drivers it has been even a more dramatic reduction, 80%. Responsible people decided there were things that could be done. Laws became tougher. They were enforced more consistently. We curtailed legal access to alcohol for some people. There were howls of protest throughout the early years of mandatory seat belt laws, like requiring someone to belt up was some sort of drastic infringement on our rights. Car manufacturers tried to push back against rules mandating they make their vehicles safer, because while I am never going to drive drunk, a drunk might run into me and my car needs to do a better job of protecting me.
But through all of that we did it. Yes, too many still die at the hands of a drunk driver. Too many die on the highways period. But if the rates were the same as they were in 1982, there would literally be tens of thousands more deaths on our highways.
Enact some common sense restrictions on firearms that serve no legitimate purpose in the hands of the average law abiding person. Limit every firearm transaction to those who hold a federal firearms license. Most importantly, once you have been convicted of a violent crime of any sort, you forfeit the right to legally possess a firearm. And yes, for those people I am talking confiscation. We already confiscate all sorts of things from people through asset forfeiture. Sometimes BEFORE they have been convicted. Violent criminals have no need to possess a firearm.
Most gun owners are ultra-responsible. The vast, vast majority will never do anything stupid or illegal with their weapons. Why are they the least bit interested in letting those who are violent or criminals hold on to their guns? Yes, I know the worst criminals out there will sometimes find a way to get their hands on a weapon, but by doing the things I and many other suggest, it will be a lot fewer. And like drunk driving, we won't prevent all criminal use of firearms. We might not even prevent every mass shooting. But maybe we prevent the next one that takes the life of someone you know.
trixR4kids
Well-known member
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Well then might as well not even try mIrite!?!??
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Aren't there already laws in place that prohibit felons from possessing a gun? Also, I think there are laws in place that prohibit people convicted of domestic abuse from possessing a gun, and I'm not sure those are even felonies.
I guess I don't know how you define "violent crime" but I have to assume most of them fall under the definition of felony in most states.
Aren't there already laws in place that prohibit felons from possessing a gun? Also, I think there are laws in place that prohibit people convicted of domestic abuse from possessing a gun, and I'm not sure those are even felonies.
I guess I don't know how you define "violent crime" but I have to assume most of them fall under the definition of felony in most states.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Violent crimes are not all felonies. Plenty of people are convicted of misdemeanor violent crimes. Some are charged with felonies initially and plead guilty to or are eventually convicted of some lessor offense. People can be convicted of assault, battery, attempted assaults or battery, stalking, menacing and other violent crimes that are misdemeanors. Some states prohibit people from concealed carry if they have convictions like these, but not the owning of firearms. Some let people with certain conviction eventually obtain concealed carry permits.
As I said, the vast majority of gun owners commit NO crimes. They also never use their weapons in a stupid or dangerous way. Why should we even consider coddling the few people in society who do have any sort of a record? Who cares if a guy who beat his wife 15 years ago can no longer posses a firearm legally? Its like Todd Bertuzzi. Would the NHL have been lessened if he had never been allowed to play again after what he did to Steve Moore? No. Just like we should not care if anyone who commits a violent crime is prevented from owning a firearm, no matter how trivial you might believe that crime to be. This seems like a no-brainer to me. And as I also posted, I'm talking confiscation as well. You don't want your 200 guns taken and melted down? Be responsible enough to never commit a crime. I have managed to go 52 years without committing one, and I'm kind of a dick.
Violent crimes are not all felonies. Plenty of people are convicted of misdemeanor violent crimes. Some are charged with felonies initially and plead guilty to or are eventually convicted of some lessor offense. People can be convicted of assault, battery, attempted assaults or battery, stalking, menacing and other violent crimes that are misdemeanors. Some states prohibit people from concealed carry if they have convictions like these, but not the owning of firearms. Some let people with certain conviction eventually obtain concealed carry permits.
As I said, the vast majority of gun owners commit NO crimes. They also never use their weapons in a stupid or dangerous way. Why should we even consider coddling the few people in society who do have any sort of a record? Who cares if a guy who beat his wife 15 years ago can no longer posses a firearm legally? Its like Todd Bertuzzi. Would the NHL have been lessened if he had never been allowed to play again after what he did to Steve Moore? No. Just like we should not care if anyone who commits a violent crime is prevented from owning a firearm, no matter how trivial you might believe that crime to be. This seems like a no-brainer to me. And as I also posted, I'm talking confiscation as well. You don't want your 200 guns taken and melted down? Be responsible enough to never commit a crime. I have managed to go 52 years without committing one, and I'm kind of a dick.
Last edited:
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Didn't someone already say if you're going to put in the effort the bolded will be as much work as doing those twenty (low estimate) baby steps.
Didn't someone already say if you're going to put in the effort the bolded will be as much work as doing those twenty (low estimate) baby steps.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Trump appointee? Clearly ignorant by definition, right?
In this case I'd argue "yes" because how can a DOD appointee not understand what "semi-automatic" means.
"Semi-automatic". Like one activation of the trigger produces a single round fired and advances to the next available round with no other operator action. That would be every handgun made (including revolvers) except for the Derringer*.
*A Derringer only has one round.
Trump appointee? Clearly ignorant by definition, right?
In this case I'd argue "yes" because how can a DOD appointee not understand what "semi-automatic" means.
"Semi-automatic". Like one activation of the trigger produces a single round fired and advances to the next available round with no other operator action. That would be every handgun made (including revolvers) except for the Derringer*.
*A Derringer only has one round.
Last edited:
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
The Air Farce (not a typo) failed to report this recent Texas cretin to NICS even after incarcerating him for a year.
Then the recent Texas cretin lies on his form to purchase the weapon.
The NICS process and system failed.
All the systems and processes in the world ... eventually fail.
The Air Farce (not a typo) failed to report this recent Texas cretin to NICS even after incarcerating him for a year.
Then the recent Texas cretin lies on his form to purchase the weapon.
The NICS process and system failed.
All the systems and processes in the world ... eventually fail.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
The money needs to go into enforcement. We starve the enforcement side. We probably don't have enough money on the Court side either. I've read some articles over the years and the starve the Government philosophy has made many many laws that are on the books already worthless cause no one has any money/time to enforce them properly.
The money needs to go into enforcement. We starve the enforcement side. We probably don't have enough money on the Court side either. I've read some articles over the years and the starve the Government philosophy has made many many laws that are on the books already worthless cause no one has any money/time to enforce them properly.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Training with a focus on de-escalation. More cops.
Training with a focus on de-escalation. More cops.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II
Please define enforcement as you see it. (I'm still listening.)
Please define enforcement as you see it. (I'm still listening.)
- Status