It's Not Too Soon to Debate Gun Control

[jardiniere]

In my state background checks must be done for ALL gun ownership transfers. If you don't you have broken the law and the sale is an illegal sale.

I am more than willing to consider gun owner licensing. All states require licensing/permit for concealed carry. It would actually make sales very simple with a nationwide data base, just like background checks.

In Wisconsin, we have very lax gun control laws, and are attempting to make them even more lax.
From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal:

Right now, children as young as 10 can hunt in Wisconsin without passing a safety course if they're accompanied by a mentor. The mentor must remain within arm's length of the student, and they can have only one weapon between them. The number of mentored hunt licenses has steadily grown, from 19,054 in 2010, the program's first year, to 31,250 in fiscal year 2014, according to the Department of Natural Resources.

Under Rep. Joel Kleefisch's bill (AB411), anyone of any age could hunt without safety training alongside a mentor, and the mentor could carry his or her own weapon.

Newsweek:

Wisconsin is known for its lax gun regulations. Machine guns are legal, and the state allows both open carry and concealed carry, albeit with a license.

Another bill heading to the Wisconsin State Senate soon would get rid of the licensing requirement for concealed carry, meaning no background check or special training would be necessary. The same bill would allow schools to decide for themselves whether they would permit guns, instead of the current law, which is a blanket gun prohibition on school grounds.

I'm actually not horrified by hunting with children, if the child is willing. But allowing a young child to walk along with a weapon in a field or forest, seems to me like asking for accidents to happen. And are young kids physically able to lock and unlock an gun safety? I'm not sure I'd accompany a 5 year old on a hunt, frankly, simply due to lack of physical development.

 

[Almost there]

True. But these types of shootings are not overall a high percentage of shooting deaths and injuries.

Agreed. Most are suicides, IIRC. And most of the folks who kill others with guns were already not supposed to have them. I'm thinking of the Chicago statistics that I see every single Monday.

Guns really are not the problem. The problem is the individuals and the culture.

A hundred years ago kids brought guns to school to hopefully shoot dinner on the way home. School shootings were not a problem back then. In fact, the rally big mass killing at a school was with a bomb.

 

[mark46]

So, you're suggesting that the Constitution needs to be changed to take away guns from conservatives? I disagree. In any case, your position simply gives up.

We need legislation to get rid of devices that make semi-automatic weapons into automatic weapons. We need to get get rid of semi-automatic weapons. These are steps.
=====
I agree that much more needs to be done.

It is huge step forward for the president to state (now twice, three if we include opioid abuse as a mental illness) that mental illness is a serious problem. NOW, let's analyze our approach to mental illness and to increase rather than decrease federal finds for treatment and prevention.

I'll post a radical idea that is going to get you mad at me, but the killings are going to continue until conservatives give up their gun rights. There are people that are so passionate about an idea that they will act out. Bomb an abortion clinic. Beat Gays. Attack other races. I think a large part of this a frenzied public that intends to show how dangerous guns are.

Both groups targeted in the last 2 weeks were white conservative Christians, by white males that are dead, and can no longer testify. Next, I think attacks on minorities are going to be possed as retribution.

 

[mark46]

The governor of TEXAS spoke and noted that Texan law requires a permit to carry guns. This killer was REFUSED a permit. So, better ENFORCEMENT of gun LAWS would help. It would also help for all to have laws as Texas does.

 

[mark46]

Agreed. Most are suicides, IIRC. And most of the folks who kill others with guns were already not supposed to have them. I'm thinking of the Chicago statistics that I see every single Monday.

Guns really are not the problem. The problem is the individuals and the culture.

A hundred years ago kids brought guns to school to hopefully shoot dinner on the way home. School shootings were not a problem back then. In fact, the rally big mass killing at a school was with a bomb.

SOME SITUATIONS WHERE FOLKS ARE KILLED WITH GUNS
1) ISIS influenced folks
2) gangs
3) suicide
4) mental illness and suicide by cop
5) mental illness
6) drug associated crime or other actions
7) Home accidents because of lack of training or leaving guns not locked up

GUN CONTROL WON'T STOP OF EVEN REDUCE ALL OF THESE
In fact, none of these will be stopped. In fact the number of crimes may not be decreased. However, the number of deaths and the extent of injuries is likely to be reduced.
===========
MODEST PROPOSAL
However, we (at a federal or state level) can do a little bit generally that might reduce the number of deaths.
1) We can ban devices that transform semi-atomic guns into automatic guns.
2) We can ban semi-automatic guns.
3) We can enforce background checks, including prosecuting gun sellers who sold guns in violation of current law. The gun show loophole should be closed.
4) We can have permits for carrying guns in public, including a background check. (Texas law)
======
I AGREE that looking at EXTENSIVE gun laws is a diversion. Obviously ISIS folk can use cars. Reducing the availability of semi-automatics and automatics will help is SOME situations. The rest are issues are law enforcement (and helping them PERHAPS with registration), more focus on preventing and treating the mentally ill, and more focus on preventing and treating opioid addiction. BTW, prosecuting or suing those who sell illegal guns and who promote the sale of opioids might help a lot.

 

[Almost there]

SOME SITUATIONS WHERE FOLKS ARE KILLED WITH GUNS
1) ISIS influenced folks
2) gangs
3) suicide
4) mental illness and suicide by cop
5) mental illness
6) drug associated crime or other actions
7) Home accidents because of lack of training or leaving guns not locked up

GUN CONTROL WON'T STOP OF EVEN REDUCE ALL OF THESE
In fact, none of these will be stopped. In fact the number of crimes may not be decreased. However, the number of deaths and the extent of injuries is likely to be reduced.
===========
MODEST PROPOSAL
However, we (at a federal or state level) can do a little bit generally that might reduce the number of deaths.
1) We can ban devices that transform semi-atomic guns into automatic guns.
2) We can ban semi-automatic guns.
3) We can enforce background checks, including prosecuting gun sellers who sold guns in violation of current law. The gun show loophole should be closed.
4) We can have permits for carrying guns in public, including a background check. (Texas law)
======
I AGREE that looking at EXTENSIVE gun laws is a diversion. Obviously ISIS folk can use cars. Reducing the availability of semi-automatics and automatics will help is SOME situations. The rest are issues are law enforcement (and helping them PERHAPS with registration), more focus on preventing and treating the mentally ill, and more focus on preventing and treating opioid addiction. BTW, prosecuting or suing those who sell illegal guns and who promote the sale of opioids might help a lot.

I think the problem is not guns. It is people. I think simple enforcement of existing laws will be the best mix of "safety vs loss of freedom". Anything else to be done can focus on making people obey the laws better and less likely to try to kill people when they are upset.

 

[lasthero]

A hundred years ago kids brought guns to school to hopefully shoot dinner on the way home.

Not to call you a liar, but I find that extremely doubtful. Admittedly, I'm no history major, but...

 

[Almost there]

Not to call you a liar, but I find that extremely doubtful. Admittedly, I'm no history major, but...

This is not what I had in mind, but it does make the point:
As late as the 1960s kids were bringing their own guns to school, why are there more school shootings now?

Louis L'Amoure, an historian, regarding the 18th and 19th century US was my primary source for this. In fact, he tells of this being true in his own family. If dad gave you three cartridges, you were expected to come home with three rabbits, etc. Cartridges were considered expensive. It was common to have a bunch of rifles near the coat rack and they were as naturally there as were the coats when it was cold.

It is only from a late 20th century urban US paradigm or megalopolis suburb paradigm that this appears to be a foreign concept.

Here is some more on the subject, and it is actually pretty enlightening stuff in general.
Kids and Guns at School, by L. Neil Smith

 

[LostMarbels]

In Wisconsin, we have very lax gun control laws, and are attempting to make them even more lax.
From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal:


Newsweek:


I'm actually not horrified by hunting with children, if the child is willing. But allowing a young child to walk along with a weapon in a field or forest, seems to me like asking for accidents to happen. And are young kids physically able to lock and unlock an gun safety? I'm not sure I'd accompany a 5 year old on a hunt, frankly, simply due to lack of physical development.

From my experience, in my family, a 5-year-old 'might' get a daisy air rifle (BB gun) for Christmas. 'If' they are mature enough to understand what a gun was. And they did not, we did not, operate it alone, ever. If I did not treat that gun like a woman, and open the door for it I would get smacked. Set it on the ground, smack. Forget to put on the safety, smack. Not pay attention to my surroundings, it would be taken from me and I would have to sit there as everyone else played. Then I get an hour lecture on how to properly hold and use a gun. It got to the point that if you couldn't tell them what the parts of the gun were, you weren't allowed to operate it.

Once we showed competence we were allowed to shoot it in Cub Scout events, and earn the Air Rifle Shooting merit badge as Webloes.

By 9, and only if we had already completed tote and chip Merit badge, and had no corners cut off you're card, we were given a .22 long rifle and used to compete in Boy Scouts. Earned the Rifle Merit Badge.

Right around 12 or so, if we were responsible enough we got to use shot guns, 30-06, 7.62, 9mm, 10mm, .45 etc.... However, before you were allowed to carry, or sling a weapon to or from an event, you had to be in the Order of the Arrow. Basically, you had to be an exemplary scout.

Basically, when I was a kid, we learned about guns. We didn't dare touch our own gun in the closet because we knew what it was. There was no curiosity. We've shot it. We knew what it doses. We also knew we were going to get a whooping for looking at it without permission. And it had better be properly stowed when Mom looked in there.

I don't think every child had my Experience. I lived in the country. But if you teach you're child when they are young they learn responsibility. That kind of Americana is all but gone in today's society. It's a shame.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I think the problem is not guns. It is people. I think simple enforcement of existing laws will be the best mix of "safety vs loss of freedom". Anything else to be done can focus on making people obey the laws better and less likely to try to kill people when they are upset.

In the end to make firearms retailers responsible for the actions of the undiagnosed mentally challenged, isn't the answer, either.

Neither would abolishing double jeopardy (as Tony Blair managed to do in the UK), nor making admissible lawyering arguments such as 'you must believe me when I said I lied' in order to ease the conviction of people who were not responsible for the actions of other people in any case.

But it is part of the mindset of single issue campaigners to make all sorts of far fetched demands. And part of the mindset of politicians to interpret the law and common sense via polls and lobbying.

 

[LostMarbels]

So, you're suggesting that the Constitution needs to be changed to take away guns from conservatives? I disagree. In any case, your position simply gives up.

Umm no. that is not my position.

We need legislation to get rid of devices that make semi-automatic weapons into automatic weapons. We need to get get rid of semi-automatic weapons. These are steps.
=====
I agree that much more needs to be done.

I do not agree.

 

[Rion]

How do you, anyone, think registering guns would stop crimes committed with guns?

Especially since the last guy had the guns illegally.

They’ve ruled on your existing laws/constitution.

Here’s a hint........you’re allowed to amend them....

And most people don't want to amend it, so what's the problem?

 

[faroukfarouk]

This is not what I had in mind, but it does make the point:
As late as the 1960s kids were bringing their own guns to school, why are there more school shootings now?

Louis L'Amoure, an historian, regarding the 18th and 19th century US was my primary source for this. In fact, he tells of this being true in his own family. If dad gave you three cartridges, you were expected to come home with three rabbits, etc. Cartridges were considered expensive. It was common to have a bunch of rifles near the coat rack and they were as naturally there as were the coats when it was cold.

It is only from a late 20th century urban US paradigm or megalopolis suburb paradigm that this appears to be a foreign concept.

Grandad in Idaho to granddaughter: How come you've gotten all those piercings and tattoos? (By the way, take the gun and kill us a rabbit for supper.)

Grandad in Washington, DC, to granddaughter: Thought you might like this voucher for the parlor as a Christmas present. (By the way, great that you're a vegetarian already.)

 

[Almost there]

This may give everyone some perspective on what the real problem just may be today:

http://www.patriotacademy.com/gun-control-founders-thought/

 

[SummerMadness]

The president is already blaming mental health, but how can we talk about addressing mental health when you sought to cut funding for mental health?

Proposed Trump Cuts Imperil Mental Health, Health Care, Education and More

The budget proposed by President Donald J. Trump threatens critical health, scientific research and education programs that contribute to the social safety net for millions of Americans, according to the American Psychological Association.

“This budget, if enacted, would jeopardize our nation’s educational, scientific and health enterprises and limit access to critically needed mental and behavioral health services,” said APA President Antonio E. Puente, PhD. “These cuts would disproportionately affect people living in poverty, people with serious mental illness and other disabilities, women, children, people living with HIV/AIDS, older adults, ethnic and racial minorities, immigrants, and members of the LGBTQ community.”

Among the cuts denounced by APA:

Almost $400 million from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, including a roughly 22 percent reduction from the Community Mental Health Services Block Grant.

 

[faroukfarouk]

This may give everyone some perspective on what the real problem just may be today:

http://www.patriotacademy.com/gun-control-founders-thought/

Great quote in there:

Proverbs 18:2 states that “A fool has no delight in understanding, but in expressing his own heart,”

 

[Almost there]

Great quote in there:

Proverbs 18:2 states that “A fool has no delight in understanding, but in expressing his own heart,”

There is a lot of that in social media.

I've argued on the internet a lot with folks I disagree with. If I don't find my opinion either changing or being clarified from time to time, I feel a time of reflection is in order. What is comical is that at a mostly liberal site where I've posted for over a decade, and publicly changed my viewpoint a few times, I'm accused of being "opinionated" by people who have never, EVER publicly changed their viewpoint on the site. Which is one of the reasons I see "projection" as a main tool of the left. A perfect modern example is Antifa, which is a fascist orgainzation.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'll post a radical idea that is going to get you mad at me, but the killings are going to continue until conservatives give up their gun rights. There are people that are so passionate about an idea that they will act out. Bomb an abortion clinic. Beat Gays. Attack other races. I think a large part of this a frenzied public that intends to show how dangerous guns are.

It sounds like you're saying that these latest massacres occurred because of the gun debate?

I'm certainly not saying that anyone's going to talk this country into tossing all their guns into the recycling bin (beat them into plowshares, as it were), or that if it were somehow to happen, our problems would miraculously go away... but that's the worst-case scenario that some conservatives always come down to -- "you liberals want to take away our guns!"

But is the topic of more regulations on certain firearms so taboo that it's can't even be openly talked about? How many bloodbaths must we wade through before we're actually willing to at least discuss options -- some of which might include, yes, making certain types of firearms harder to come by?

 

[Almost there]

The president is already blaming mental health, but how can we talk about addressing mental health when you sought to cut funding for mental health?

Proposed Trump Cuts Imperil Mental Health, Health Care, Education and More

Not the federal government's job. Not in their mission statement.

 

[faroukfarouk]

There is a lot of that in social media.

I've argued on the internet a lot with folks I disagree with. If I don't find my opinion either changing or being clarified from time to time, I feel a time of reflection is in order. What is comical is that at a mostly liberal site where I've posted for over a decade, and publicly changed my viewpoint a few times, I'm accused of being "opinionated" by people who have never, EVER publicly changed their viewpoint on the site. Which is one of the reasons I see "projection" as a main tool of the left. A perfect modern example is Antifa, which is a fascist orgainzation.

Some politicians talk about consultation, and they have already decided what they are determined to do.

Some secularists vigorously reject the relevance of church activities, and proceed to bare their souls to their therapists, who are only to happy to listen if they are paid.

Radical gun control advocates can sometimes blame police and legislators for not having 'done something' if people near and dear to themselves get hurt.

North American society can be a funny place.