Gun control - murderer control?

[Gfted1]

Thats actually a great idea! Millennials should go squat in DC for a few years.

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

But isn't the US already in a completely hopeless situation? Even if all guns are banned, it will mean almost nothing. Even if all guns have to be "brought back", only the "good guys" will comply. There is no way to get the guns away or back from the people that shouldn't have them. I can't see any way out of this situation for the US. For every other country in the world, perhaps, but not the US. The point of no return has been passed a long long time ago.

well, the single largest category o' gun related deaths in the US is suicides, and if you make suicide even a tiny bit more inconvenient, deaths decrease dramatic. am knowing such is hard to believe, but serious do a search for coal fire ovens and suicide in uk and us. 

also, o' the remaining +40% o' firearms deaths, "accident" and impulse account for the greatest numbers. is not drug dealers, burglars and carjackers who account for most firearm deaths. folks like gd know the statistics and don't care. if you own a firearm, you is far more likely to die by firearm than those who do not own guns. domestic disputes. shoot innocent person on your property mistaken thinking they is a nogoodnik. kids get access and shoot friend, brother, sister. etc. the vast majority o' felonious firearms deaths is stoopid and utter avoidable.

am gonna repeat, the assault weapon ban worked and were a total failure at the same time. the thing is, when was the last time you heard o' somebody in the US killed with an uzi? no doubt you may find such examples, but is extreme rare. were a popular weapon o' gang members and drug dealers in the 70s and 80s, but almost over night their use stopped. the bad guys didn't just voluntarily give up their uzis, did they? serious criminals, the folks who is not doing crime outta impulsive anger or reflexive fear, find alternatives 'cause the penalties related to the assault weapon ban were kinda onerous.  the assault weapon ban worked, but overall firearms deaths didn't drop noticeable. make a more comprehensive version o' the assault weapon ban and sure, more than a few criminals would continue using firearms, but gun numbers would dwindle as police would be taking more than a few weapons off the streets either in response to arrests or buybacks and those losses would not be replaced with new sales.  no, you would never get rid o' all weapons, but the vast majority o' such weapons would disappear.

that said, am not thinking a total ban is needed. is worth noting how sweden has a whole lotta personal firearms. the thing is, sweden is a less diverse population which doesn't suffer US sorta income disparity problems. am assuming sweden also responds better to mental health problems 'cause is tough to imagine being much worse than the US. sweden makes gun ownership a privilege earned after submitting an application and passing a test after which weapons need be stored and maintained responsible. 

'course the US wouldn't be able to achieve sweden kinda results w/o addressing the entirety o' the gun problem, and is unlikely the US solves larger social issues as we reflexive try and remove ar-15s from the hands o' the anticipated mass shooters.

HA! Good Fun!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

On 6/1/2022 at 11:56 PM, ShadySands said:

I've come around and would now be okay with banning all guns. It wouldn't be my first choice but I could live with it.

I think that's both politically and practically impossible.

5 hours ago, Raithe said:

For that edge of snark..

The youngest Millennial is 25 and we've been voting for years now. Dip**** boomers and Xers need to update their lexicon on who the young folks are these days.

[Sarex]

4 hours ago, KP wants Blue Velvet said:

I think that's both politically and practically impossible.

Practically, it's for sure impossible. Here in Serbia, there is tons of unregistered weaponry, from pistols to bombs. There is no practical way to fix that, but there is no pressing need to do so as carrying a weapon is illegal without a license and getting a license to carry is VERY hard for a civilian. People still die from firearms, but apart from accidents those cases would, most probably, have a tragic outcome either way.

As for why we don't have school shootings, I couldn't say for sure. I would not say that we have great care for our mentally ill, but maybe we have better schools systems that identify them...writing that now and thinking about it I can't say that is the case either. Maybe it's because we are not that nonchalant with guns and have respect and fear of them, children usually don't even know that there is a gun in the house and they have no other way of getting them. I think parents wised up on that after a few cases where kids accidentally killed themselves or their friends while playing with a gun.

I think the US treats weapons way too casually (driving too), banning guns is not a solution, changing the public's perspective is, but I imagine that is almost impossible in the US too.

Either way it should not be that easy to get a gun, or drive a car for that matter...

Edited June 5, 2022 by Sarex

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

21 hours ago, Sarex said:

Practically, it's for sure impossible. Here in Serbia, there is tons of unregistered weaponry, from pistols to bombs. There is no practical way to fix that, but there is no pressing need to do so as carrying a weapon is illegal without a license and getting a license to carry is VERY hard for a civilian. People still die from firearms, but apart from accidents those cases would, most probably, have a tragic outcome either way.

As for why we don't have school shootings, I couldn't say for sure. I would not say that we have great care for our mentally ill, but maybe we have better schools systems that identify them...writing that now and thinking about it I can't say that is the case either. Maybe it's because we are not that nonchalant with guns and have respect and fear of them, children usually don't even know that there is a gun in the house and they have no other way of getting them. I think parents wised up on that after a few cases where kids accidentally killed themselves or their friends while playing with a gun.

I think the US treats weapons way too casually (driving too), banning guns is not a solution, changing the public's perspective is, but I imagine that is almost impossible in the US too.

Either way it should not be that easy to get a gun, or drive a car for that matter...

Yeah, even not factoring in unregistered or illegal firearms I think that even in the unlikely event there was a ban on guns they're widespread enough to make getting all of them a logistical nightmare. And when you add in the 3d printed guns into the mix, well interesting times and all that.

As far as driving, it's widespread and easily accessible because public or mass transit here is a joke and a substantial amount of cities were bulldozed and designed in a way that necessitates having a car. It's....not good.

[Gfted1]

I wouldnt let a silly thing like a label stop a good squatting. "Over 951 cities across 82 countries, and in over 600 communities in the United States" have been brought to their knees and the same should be done in DC to combat gun control.

[Gromnir]

*sigh*

the majority o' US states has had fewer mass shooting deaths (definitions is all over the map, but am gonna use the more common euro definition o' four fatalities for a single incident) since 2006 than has serbia, and the death per 100k population during same time frame has serbia way out in front o' the US taken entire... 'course norway still holds the record for deaths per 100k by a large margin which shows how mass shootings is kinda difficult to measure and compare. in fact, the vast majority o' US states has had two or fewer such incidents since 1982. 

is also difficult to identify a s'posed US attitude 'bout firearms.  particular given the increased polarization o' the last decade or so, is tough to identify shared american values. when we were younger, free speech were one o' those core values 'bout which an overwhelming % o' americans agreed, but is less the case today than at any point in our lifetime. consensus on firearms is far more elusive. is a considerable % o' americans (almost 3/4 according to a few recent polls) who is in favor o' red flag laws and increased background checks, but there is also the no compromisers who believe the libs is looking to confiscate their guns and any limit on firearms makes such confiscations more likely. 

'course the most obvious hurdle to gun reform is the second amendment. you need a new Constitutional Amendment to address gun issues substantive, and even more limited you need exceed the 60 senator filibuster barrier to do anything noteworthy... and we couldn't even get 60 senators on board to address bumpstocks post vegas. compare to country X or nation Y is gonna be problematic as we got the second amendment which am recognizing most people (even americans) do not understand. there is no fundamental right to drive a car or truck in the US. is therefore possible to implement rational basis limits on drivers and driving. the Constitution of the United States of America recognizes an explicit right to bear arms, and there aren't many such rights recognized. have explained how there is no right to vote for President, which surprises more than a few people. furthermore, SCOTUS says gun rights is not only a limit on the fed government but on states as well as local municipalities and that as current read, the "well regulated militia" stuff is kinda throwaway language (which makes no sense given the founders specific added the language to a previous draft which did not have the "militia" language) and that semiautomatic handguns is exact the kinda weapon the founders had envisioned when contemplating a right to bear arms. *eye roll* also, and am not sure how many times we need repeat, the assault weapon ban worked. uzis and ar-15s weren't used in crimes for a considerable period o' time. when the assault weapon ban were passed, one o' the main arguments against it were so-called practical issues such as the existence o' such weapons in large numbers w/o and absent a mechanic for confiscation. so-called practical limits being imagined don't bear the scrutiny o' relative recent history, but the second amendment is different. is a functional insurmountable hurdle given the current political climate.

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

[Gorgon]

I just realized the thread is from 2014 and started by Walshingham. Fitting I think, to demonstrate the futility of it all. The media cycle for this round of mass shootings are fast running out already, Bidens majority is tiny, he doesn't dare throw it away,  there is also the senate.

 

Not enough dead babies this time either, nothing is going to come of it. 

 

 

[Malcador]

What they need is massive taxation on bullets.

[BruceVC]

5 minutes ago, Gorgon said:

I just realized the thread is from 2014 and started by Walshingham. Fitting I think, to demonstrate the futility of it all. The media cycle for this round of mass shootings are fast running out already, Bidens majority is tiny, he doesn't dare throw it away,  there is also the senate.

 

Not enough dead babies this time either, nothing is going to come of it. 

 

 

Whats your suggestion to  mass shootings in the US?

[Gorgon]

They need to grow up and  stop pretending that this is not about all the guns in circulation. Of course it is. 

Also, they have decided democratically that they are not willing to fundamentally change the constitutionally protected right to said guns. So - it is what it is.