Current Topics
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2018
by Jeffery J. Haas
Yesterday at 04:58 AM
Clint Walker - "Cheyenne" turns 90 today
by Golem
05/22/18 10:51 PM
The End of the Independent Judiciary
by NW Ponderer
05/22/18 02:28 PM
The Democratic Plan
by rporter314
05/22/18 10:42 AM
Round Table for May, 2018
by pondering_it_all
05/22/18 08:57 AM
Are we at War with Iran?
by pdx rick
05/22/18 04:04 AM
Time check in
by chunkstyle
05/21/18 01:36 PM
What it will take to curb the President
by Ujest Shurly
05/20/18 08:41 PM
A Thought
by jgw
05/15/18 06:42 PM
TRUMP 2020!
by jgw
05/15/18 06:39 PM
States and campaign finance
by jgw
05/13/18 06:08 PM
The Mob Boss with Pardon Power
by pondering_it_all
05/11/18 09:35 PM
Richard Painter Switches from GOP to DFL in Senate Run
by pondering_it_all
05/11/18 05:58 AM
Federalist Society Promotes Drug Use
by NW Ponderer
05/10/18 06:54 PM
Bernie's got unions backs
by chunkstyle
05/10/18 03:23 AM
Democratic Purity
by pdx rick
05/09/18 04:42 AM
Playin' Doctor
by pondering_it_all
05/08/18 02:35 AM
What is it with John Kerry Negotiating with the Enemy?
by Jeffery J. Haas
05/07/18 09:13 PM
University of Florida Apologizes After Black Graduates Were Manhandled at Commen
by Golem
05/07/18 07:41 PM
Cavuto: Is Trump giving the media very real ammunition?
by pondering_it_all
05/06/18 07:59 PM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16270 Topics
280208 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#305767 - 02/25/18 08:47 PM Gun Control
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
This morning I listened to the blather about gun control. As far as I can tell one side says that any gun control will take away their second amendment right and the other side says, no, we just want controls on guns.

Both sides are just wrong.

First those against gun control.
Their claim that it threatens their second amendment right is just flat out wrong and demonstrably wrong. Nobody is suggesting taking away all the guns, only that they want gov to exercise its constitutional right to regulate as stated in the first 3 words of the second amendment, ie. "a well regulated militia".

Second, those who are for gun control.
They are wrong in even sitting down with those against as their argument has more to do with fear than fact.

I believe the actual arguments about gun control should be about the degree of regulation and the reasons thereof. Its that simple (in my own mind). All the rest, is just plain blather promulgated by the media in their ongoing efforts to gain viewers irregardless of the damage they do in that regard (which I feel to be real and defined).

The gun arguments are now in the forefront (well, after Lying Jackass distraction) and are all about gun violence. The facts, I think, are VERY clear. Every other civilized nation on the face of the earth controls guns in their society to one degree or another. Every other civilized nation on the face of the earth does not have the degree of gun violence of that experienced by the United States of America. We are actually considered to be a very dangerous place by the other nations of the earth.

The simple fact is that the basic difference, between the United States, and the rest of the world, is one single thing - GUN CONTROL! That's it! Any arguments to the contrary have been disproved over and over again - Gun Control=less gun violence. I find it very strange that there can even be argument over this and the only reason, I can see for this, is the media entertaining a false offering of both sides as that means they are supporting fact and fiction (the two sides). If media had any integrity they would not allow fiction to be passed off as fact to an obviously, and incredibly, ignorant American public.

The fiction side, I should add, has done a REALLY great job of making their side somehow non-fiction without really proving anything at all, except for their incredible skill at bullsh*t.

So, again, if we want to have a serious discussion about gun control it should be about degree of regulation and not about regulation and no regulation.

Top
#305769 - 02/26/18 12:53 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
We already have all sorts of gun regulations and almost everybody operates within them. EG. Hardly anybody has a fully automatic weapon outside of law enforcement and the military. Almost nobody saws off their shotgun barrel, when it means prison time. So we have not had "no regulation" since the 1920's. So the "any law violates the 2nd Amendment" argument is pure BS.

My solution doesn't interfere with any qualified person's right to own a gun for defense of their home. Everybody seems to agreed that certain classes of people should not own guns, but the NRA (which says they agree!) fights every attempt to implement this.

So, end this problem in just four easy steps.

1) Get rid of politicians who are owned and operated by the NRA.
2) Register all guns of every type, so government knows where they are.
3) Make it mandatory to report all criminals, domestic abusers, mentally disturbed people, users of anti-depressants, people who have threatened murder or suicide, etc. to the existing federal database.
4) Send police to pick up the guns of people on both lists.

Sure gun nuts will freak out over #2, because "the government can take our guns away if they know where they are". Exactly right, and the government SHOULD take guns away from people who shouldn't have them. They can't do their job of "ensuring domestic tranquility" if they don't have this list. And any gun owner especially upset about this would probably qualify for a place on list #3!

Top
#305770 - 02/26/18 02:51 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13119
Loc: Whittier, California
Let the politicians coin a phrase for it, a republic in which citizens are born with the 2A rights inherent, upon adulthood.
There still exist limitations which ordinary citizens can get over if they are qualified, but the basic right to 2A self defense is guaranteed, unless and until the citizen misuses or abuses that right.
Then their rights start to be restricted, based on the severity of the issue. If it's any kind of violent behavior, it must be reviewed.
We already put people on a NO FLY list if their activities or conduct alerts authorities. We can argue as to the manner in which they operate however it is awfully tough to challenge their right to do their job.
Sometimes it's possible to get taken off the NO FLY LIST.

No reason we can't compile a database that operates in similar fashion.

I don't know what you'd call that system but as I said, let the politicians coin a phrase for it because I guarantee you the gun crowd WILL coin a phrase for it.
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#305771 - 02/26/18 02:55 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13119
Loc: Whittier, California
Once a standard for appropriate USE is established, anything outside of that standard becomes misuse and abuse.
Making threats, verbal, via print, via telephone or internet, to use a gun in a violent manner invokes abuse of your 2A right, and therefore amounts to points in the abuse column.
Zero points in the abuse column, your 2A rights stay intact, enough points in the abuse column, your 2A rights begin to be restricted.
Too MANY points in the abuse column, you lose your 2A rights altogether. Your ID or driver's license receives a mark on it that tells gun dealers that you are not allowed to purchase guns or ammunition.
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#305775 - 02/26/18 06:57 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 13939
Loc: Florida

Laudable, Jefferey, but first let's see if we can just get a moratorium on the sales of assault type rifles...

What that alone would do might be remarkable. They would immediately become "collector's items" since the manufacturing would cease. After a time, they'd disappear off the streets completely and angry young men would have a harder time getting their hands on military style weaponry.
Firearm fetish fashonistas will find something else to hold against their cheek as they masturbate to firearm fantasies.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#305777 - 02/26/18 08:29 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
Just getting rid of assault rifles doesn't fix the problem. Some mass shooters have just used pistols with multiple clips. Changing clips just takes a second if you don't mind dropping the spent one.

It's a lot easier to restrict the people, not the guns, because everybody says they agree that certain people should not have guns. Once you create a mechanism for that, you can rachet it up to include as many classes of people as are necessary.

Top
#305779 - 02/27/18 12:37 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 13939
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Just getting rid of assault rifles doesn't fix the problem. Some mass shooters have just used pistols with multiple clips.
No, but it goes a long way in getting this particularly deadly weapon out of the hands of everyday mass shooters. Pistols are harder to hit sh*t with, have a shorter range, slower firing rate, and smaller clips. Bulletproof vests and backpacks will stop a pistol bullet. AR-15 blows right through them. Limit these guys to pistols for their short range work and we'd definitely see fewer casualties.
Couple that with effective background checks with lots of caveats and we might see things improve a bit.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#305782 - 02/27/18 03:29 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
Spag-hetti Online   content
member

Registered: 09/10/08
Posts: 1659
Loc: Middle, USA
So, how many of the Ar-15 owners have been well regulated? How/where/when does this "regulation" occur?

I guess it is the federal government's responsibility to regulate them.

Wait! If they are to be regulated, there must be rules. It's in the Constitution! Let there be rules. Lots of them!

Bailiff, whack their ...(cheech and Chong, anybody? Anybody?)


Edited by Spag-hetti (02/27/18 04:20 AM)
Edit Reason: my memory flashed to the future
_________________________
Just a Missouri school teacher ... stubborn as a mule and addicted to logic.

Top
#305784 - 02/27/18 04:02 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: Spag-hetti]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Quote:
I guess it is the federal government's responsibility to regulate them.

I think if you re-read the 2nd, you will notice the words well regulated "militia". Militia being the key word. Militia is a function of the several states, not the federal government ergo the phrase "well regulated" meaning, the states should just not levy farmers into service who have no military training, but actually train them.

If the states failed to meet their obligation, the federal government would have collapsed as it could not perform its mandated duty to defend against anything. The failure of the SC to recognize the significance in this regard amazes me. Had Pres Washington been unsuccessful quelling the Whiskey Rebellion in the nascent days of our republic, the experiment may just have become a footnote in a 5th grade history book.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305785 - 02/27/18 04:18 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: rporter314]
Spag-hetti Online   content
member

Registered: 09/10/08
Posts: 1659
Loc: Middle, USA
Oh! I get it!

States have well-regulated militias, typically called the National Guard or something.

So all these AR-15 owners are members of the National Guard?

Well, I'm a little disappointed in some of the recent actions of a few members of our well-regulated militia.


Edited by Spag-hetti (02/27/18 04:21 AM)
Edit Reason: dropped an article
_________________________
Just a Missouri school teacher ... stubborn as a mule and addicted to logic.

Top
#305787 - 02/27/18 02:30 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: Spag-hetti]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Quote:
States have well-regulated militias, typically called the National Guard or something.

For modern use of militia, read Militia Act of 1903 ... for use of militia prior to 1903, read about the Whiskey Rebellion ... for time at war, read about use of militias by north and south during CW, especially the home guard in the south

how and why J Scalia ignored the history of militias still eludes me
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305792 - 02/27/18 09:32 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
So there's your solution: Draft every owner of an AR-15 into the National Guard. They will quickly determine soldiers who can't follow orders and drum them out with a dishonorable discharge that puts them on the "No Guns Allowed" list!

On a more serious note: What do all these mass shooters have in common? I think it may be that they are sociopaths, and sociopathy is not that hard to detect once you start looking for it. We know a lot of the outward signs. But then you have to take the next step, which is to put sociopaths on the "No Guns Allowed" list, even if they have committed no crimes yet. As a people, we tend to resist the idea of "thought crimes" though we certainly do it with pedophiles who have never done anything illegal.

On the other hand, simply being put on the gun list is not prosecution for a crime, and it's nothing like getting put on the sex offender registry which has happened to some pedos who just sought treatment for their ideation. As far as I can tell, it would only affect people who wanted to go into an armed occupation but maybe that's for the best? Do we really want sociopathic cops?

Top
#305793 - 02/27/18 11:33 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
My suspicion is that what they have in common is that they were all under the care of a mental professional and off their meds. I am not sure about the latest but I do know that he was under care which usually means they had medication. I had a solution to this one but the AMA said it wouldn't work because they would have another problem after they had the cure (true story)

Top
#305794 - 02/27/18 11:45 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
The 'militia' thing has, over the years, come to mean just about any human being. The "well regulated" however, as far as I can see, is taken seriously by the supremes. The problem is politics and not the supremes and the politicians, if they really want, can regulate the hell out of guns. Instead they have chosen to buy into the "they are going to take all our guns away" which is a canard (a damned lie). Nobody is trying to take anybody's gun away from them unless they shouldn't have a gun (too young, too old, too crazy, etc).

In other words the gun manufacturers have managed to change the subject from regulation to "take away all the guns". The interesting thing is that, as far as I know, NOBODY has ever even suggested that but the people who are doing all the whining about it (you know, the brave gun owners of America, particularly the ignorant ones). We are now told that only 30% of our population are gun owners and only 20% of that 30% are the ones really concerned. I am not sure of the math on that one but, I think, that means that 20% of 30% is 1.5 (30/20=1.5) My mind is wrong today but, still, it seems to me that there is a very loud, and very small, minority involved in all of this.

I have never understood how very small minorities are get all this power. In the congress there are something like 400 members in the house which also has the "freedom caucus" which is made up of 29 people who, apparently run the house. Then we have this gun thing and, I suspect, the same kind of thing is going on.

Strange.................

Top
#305801 - 02/28/18 03:48 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305830 - 03/03/18 09:46 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
When Senator Marco Rubio tried to make a slippery slope argument about banning assault rifles by saying "you'd have to ban all semiautomatic rifles" the audience enthusiastically endorsed that idea. After all, who really needs a semiautomatic rifle? I've noted before that no serious hunter uses an AR for hunting. That's not what it is designed for.
Quote:
the AR-15 is very good at one thing: engaging the enemy at a rapid rate of fire. When someone like Adam Lanza uses it to take out 26 people in a matter of minutes, he’s committing a crime, but he isn’t misusing the rifle. That’s exactly what it was engineered to do.
The NRA Claims the AR-15 Is Useful for Hunting and Home Defense. Not Exactly. - Slate.

I have long maintained that anyone who claims they regularly hunt with an assault rifle is either "not a hunter" or just a plain liar. The vast majority of hunters will not use a semi auto rifle for hunting because of the accuracy issues.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305840 - 03/04/18 04:13 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 40878
Loc: Puget Sound, WA


Former US Attorney General, Eric Holder, schools Parkland High students in how to go after the NRA. smile

_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#305843 - 03/04/18 05:14 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: pdx rick]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
From the marketplace to the "marketplace of ideas." Star Opinion: Gun reform coming from the marketplace - Tucson Star. This is an ARIZONA paper.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305844 - 03/04/18 06:08 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 40878
Loc: Puget Sound, WA


...from NW_Ps link:

Quote:
Change by commerce is more potent than relying elected officials to do the right thing.


Bow
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#305845 - 03/04/18 09:56 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: pondering_it_all]
matthew Offline
newbie

Registered: 03/24/16
Posts: 334
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
What do all these mass shooters have in common? I think it may be that they are sociopaths....

Unfortunately, sociopaths seem to be unusually common in the United States --- or else, American society and institutions give them unusual opportunities to express their proclivities.
.
_________________________
Once, weapons were manufactured to fight wars; today, wars are manufactured to sell weapons

It is far easier to deceive folks than to convince them they are deceived

Top
#305846 - 03/04/18 10:41 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
Hell, sociopaths are so revered in our society, we make them President.

Top
#305860 - 03/06/18 02:03 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
I highly recommend reading this article: What Critics Don't Understand About Gun Culture - the Atlantic. It is illuminating in so many ways, many unintended by its author.

Top
#305861 - 03/06/18 03:09 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8785
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Fear, paranoia, a need to feel powerful in spite of a pervasive sense of vulnerability... all good reasons to have weapons.

Probably 30 years ago I was with my second ex-wife visiting her uncle near Boring, Oregon. We found the mobile home where he and his wife lived, in a pastoral setting on about an acre of former farmland. She hadn't seen him in years, so it was a bit uncomfortable at first introduction. He was a somewhat disheveled and red-faced fellow in his sixties and seemed very cold and distrustful. Our visit was bereft of all but a bit of hospitality, and the main subject of conversation was about his guns - six pistols stashed at strategic locations all about the trailer, one in a side pocket of his LazyBoy recliner, that he pulled out for us to admire, fully loaded, cartridge in the chamber, safety off.

I felt so incredibly safe and secure around this man that I was reluctant to leave.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#305863 - 03/06/18 05:40 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
He was (IMHO) clearly a danger to himself and others ... not an imminent danger but a danger nonetheless

so why does the NRA want people like him to have guns?
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305864 - 03/06/18 06:17 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: logtroll]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3801
Loc: Eugene, OR
uncle near Boring, Oregon.

Well, certainly Oregon was not very Boring that day. Bet you couldn’t wait to say “Aloha” Oregon.
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#305865 - 03/06/18 06:28 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: Ken Condon]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8785
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
That would be Aloha in the goodbye (and good riddance) sense.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#305866 - 03/06/18 06:29 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: rporter314]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8785
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Originally Posted By: rporter314
so why does the NRA want people like him to have guns?

Oh, I don't think the NRA gives a rip if he has guns, they just want him to buy guns.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#305867 - 03/06/18 07:38 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I would remind you all that its VERY unlikely that congress will do anything about this stuff until they get replaced. They are led by Mconnell and Ryan who are, obviously, bought and paid for, put party above nation, and will not allow any gun changes to even get voted on (along with any number of other issues that the majority of Americans want). Same with daca who the populists hate. This just goes on and on. The fault is (I am repeating myself) is how WE vote, or don't vote. The voters of America have spoken! The result is a congress of genuine yahoos of the very worst kind, trillion dollar tax cuts for the very rich, 18 year old wars, a failing infrastructure, an utterly failed war on drugs, and all the rest of it. Wish I was wrong on this one.

Perhaps those high school kids will keep at it and others will join up.

Top
#305884 - 03/08/18 04:43 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Florida has failed to enact any gun control measure instead opting to arm teachers.

So my prediction of no substantive laws regarding gun etc etc is coming a reality ... who would have guessed
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305892 - 03/08/18 08:49 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
My previous post was influenced by poor reporting. I see now Florida actually enacted some nascent substantive gun control facets to address the problem. While the more difficult issues involving assault styled weapons was not discussed, they did break ranks with the NRA on age limits (common sense should have dictated these), after-market modifications for semi to auto (bump-stocks), and new longer waiting period.

As for armed teachers, it was reported in error. No teacher will be armed, however non-teaching personal would have the option of training and being armed.

What I find hard to understand is the vote was close. These are common sense proposals, while not trying to confront the partisan issue on assault weapons directly. Universal backgrounds ... not there but some strengthening on the back end of the mental health aspect.

The Republican controlled Congress is apparently AWOL.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#305910 - 03/10/18 03:31 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: rporter314]
Spag-hetti Online   content
member

Registered: 09/10/08
Posts: 1659
Loc: Middle, USA
Ok, and so now a gunman has invaded a veterans home in Yountville, California.

Not much info right now, except gunfire was exchanged before the gunman took three hostages.

What a nightmare!

Gaia forbid that this event should be politicized, especially by lil ol me. BUT, if the old folks get as PO'd as those Parkland kids and they join together, NRA better watch out.

I know I'm pretty PO'd.
_________________________
Just a Missouri school teacher ... stubborn as a mule and addicted to logic.

Top
#305918 - 03/10/18 07:18 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
Sadly, the three women hostages were killed. It raises the point that it is not all about schools. What about concert venues, theatres, sports fields, churches?
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305942 - 03/11/18 06:09 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
This is not a hope-inspiring time, but I have some right now. Saddened as I am by the latest tragedy, even in Florida, the NRA-infused Republican legislature and governor were able to take positive, rational gun control actions (not much, but some). I hope - no, pray - that other jurisdictions will be similarly emboldened and begin to pass sensible reforms - and that the NRA's reign of terror can be brought to a close.

I am a gun owner, and in some respects, a gun advocate, but I'm also a thinking, rational, moral human being and I'm incensed by the carnage. We need to take steps to bring it under control. Universal background checks, longer waiting periods, and banning, or at least restriction, of certain equipment (bump stocks, assault weapons and extended magazines) are reasonable steps. Reality must trump fevered fantasy.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305949 - 03/12/18 05:20 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
Know who's 'afraid of the NRA'? Donald Trump.

And he will Lie, Lie, Lie about it until he's orange in the face, then lie some more.

Top
#305950 - 03/12/18 10:35 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
Well, they do have a lot of guns and a huge supply of the kind of people who have talked about assassinating a President. I suppose if a President's actions could be interpreted as a betrayal after they gave him $20 million+, there would be quite a few fanatics prepared to take him out.

I'm not saying the majority of NRA members are not good, responsible people who would never do such a thing. I'm just saying that an organization that goes out of their way to attract the insane is bound to have some members who are insane. 1 in 10000 out of 5 million members is 500 people!

Top
#306134 - 03/26/18 09:49 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: pondering_it_all]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
Santorum: Instead of calling for gun laws, kids should take CPR classes - CNN. "How about kids instead of looking to someone else to solve their problem, do something about maybe taking CPR classes or trying to deal with situations that when there is a violent shooter that you can actually respond to that," Santorum said on CNN's "State of the Union."

While patently ridiculous, and really egregiously stupid (par for Santorum), it is emblematic of Republican solutions to gun violence: they are reactive, not proactive, and no "solution" at all. Santorum, Trump, really all the NRA-backed solutions allow the shooting to take place, first. Even their mantrais "shoot back": "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun". Well, no. What stops a bad guy with a gun is not having a gun in the first place.

Sensible gun control solutions provided by the kids of Parkland:
Assault Weapons Ban - keeps the most deadly weapons off the market. More than half of the most deadly mass shootings involved Assault weapons (as defined in the 1994 legislation). More Than Half of Mass Shooters Used Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Magazines - Mother Jones. Moreover, most of them used "high capacity" (more than 10 round) magazines, even those using pistols.
Magazine size restrictions (heck, magazines at all). Most mass shootings are stopped during reloads. Here is 1 correlation between state gun laws and mass shootings
Quote:
An analysis performed for CNN found that states that have enacted magazine restrictions are associated with fewer mass shooting events.
"Whether a state has a large capacity ammunition magazine ban is the single best predictor of the mass shooting rate in that state, " said Michael Siegel, a community health science professor at Boston University, who conducted the analysis. These states are associated with a 63% lower rate of mass shootings, according to his analysis.

Expanded background checks - Fewer mass shootings occur in states with more background checks: report - the Guardian. It's pretty simple. If you conduct background checks, you catch a LOT of people who shouldn't possess a firearm. This applies beyond "mass shootings": "The gun control group made special note of the link between domestic violence and shootings, finding that there were 59 such shootings in states without background checks for all handgun sales and only 17 in states with full checks."

Top
#306136 - 03/26/18 10:55 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
I heard a piece on the Gun Trace unit of the ATFE the other day. They have a backlog that was so many boxes it was starting to buckle the floor. So they had to bring in shipping containers to hold all the request boxes. They are up to 28 containers now.

What makes it so slow is that they are forbidden by law from creating any sort of searchable database of either guns or gun owners, out of some 2nd Amendment fanatics' fears that such a database would be the first step in the government coming to take their guns. But we NEED the government to be able to efficiently take away guns from certain classes of people. Forbidding those databases is exactly why we have such an impossible task.

First and foremost we need a law that says it is the federal government's duty to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, people on probation, user's of certain drugs like anti-psychotics and anti-depressants, domestic abusers, and anybody with a history of making deadly threats. And they get to use any reasonable means to accomplish that, including databases and strict reporting rules.

I have no problem at all with hunters having shotguns and long rifles, recreational target shooters having their 22 gauge rifles and pistols, diamond dealers having their concealed handguns, etc., etc., etc.. There are many people who have a good reason to own certain guns. And there are also many people who should not.

Top
#306137 - 03/27/18 01:20 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
Spag-hetti Online   content
member

Registered: 09/10/08
Posts: 1659
Loc: Middle, USA
As a teacher, I was a mandated reporter, which means if I had reason to suspect a child was being abused, I was required to report it. Otherwise, I was in danger of losing my job, my license, a chunk of money, and/or my freedom. In addition to the lack of modern systems for processing background checks, there is also the problem of inconsistent reporting ... even from the military. When a person commits a crime using a legally acquired gun, and we find out that he/she had a record of domestic abuse, mental illness, etc., then whoever should have reported that person should face severe consequences.

And the same with those responsible for processing and disseminating that information. That information needs to be timely and correct.
_________________________
Just a Missouri school teacher ... stubborn as a mule and addicted to logic.

Top
#306140 - 03/27/18 02:02 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
We could actually do the "No Buy" list first. There are no prohibitions on keeping a good up-to-date database for quick background checks. There is such a federal database that gun sellers can check, but the problem is that it is so incomplete. We need a better mandatory reporting system, with penalties for not reporting. We need a law that this is not subject to HIPAA rules, so patients that need to be on the list get reported.

This would prevent people on the list from buying guns, but then we need the other half, which is existing gun ownership when somebody is added to the "No Buy" list. That's why we need a federal list of guns and their owners. So police can go and pick them up. And I have an answer for anybody who claims that "Government can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead hands.":

Okay, that can be arranged.

Top
#306148 - 03/27/18 04:10 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
One contrary point I need to raise. Another problem with the federal background system is that it is severely underfunded. The result is that appeals from errors take more than a year.

On more than one occasion a domestic partner, or spouse (or former) has been unable to obtain a weapon for self defense and been killed by their abuser. (The spouse of a banned person is also barred because they live in the same household.) That is an underreported issue for a reason. No one wants to take ownership of it.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#306154 - 03/27/18 05:19 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
My only real hope is that the kids get their way and vote EVERY elected with an 'A' rating from the NRA out of office. I know, wishful thinking, but they might pull it off! Remember, youth is a non-voting demographic that seems to have opened their eyes and brains. Just that, alone, should be enough to get the right to lose a little bit of sleep. Before now politicians have ignored that particular block - no more? (hopefully)

Top
#306219 - 04/02/18 09:52 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13119
Loc: Whittier, California
In related news, Alex Jones has been hit by yet ANOTHER lawsuit, and this one is going before a jury.

It looks like Alex Jones' InfoWars site and his superstar writer, Kit Daniels, picked on the wrong kid one time too many, and this kid is going to fight back.

Quote:
“Plaintiff’s photograph spread across social media platforms with astonishing speed, resulting in its distribution to millions of additional people,” the suit stated.

Bankston told HuffPost he estimates the number of people who connected Fontaine’s image to that of the shooter was in the “hundreds of millions.” Threats soon poured in against the innocent man, accusing him of being a “crisis actor” involved in a “false flag operation” as part of the “deep state,” according to the lawsuit.

“In other words, Mr. Fontaine continues to suffer harassment and peril even from individuals aware of his identity as a Masschusets resident,” the lawsuit reads.


Maybe if more people file lawsuits of this nature, we can finally see a gradual end to the knee-jerk habit of the Right where they name every single gun violence victim a "crisis actor".
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#306220 - 04/02/18 10:54 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
My hope is he can bankrupt InfoWars.

Top
#306271 - 04/06/18 09:06 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
This is a really interesting article about mass shooters and even more important, about potential mass shooters.

Anger Isn't a Mental Illness

Quote:
We know who they are long before they do it. Before people kill, they espouse hatred and blame others for their problems. They are verbally abusive and threatening. They look for the confrontation in every interaction. They deflect kindness. They curse at strangers. They threaten to hurt animals, girlfriends, rivals—and may even do so. We are repelled by their hostility, but at the same time they infuriate us, and we want to strike back. They are offensive and ostracized. Even in the field of mental health, where we strive to suspend judgement to treat the troubled, you might hear: “I’ll tell you his diagnosis—he’s an a$$hole.”


Most mass shooters are not "mentally ill" by any definition used in this country. So restricting the mentally ill from owning guns won't be very helpful. They are far more likely to commit suicide than to kill anyone else, unless they are paranoid which is quite rare.

Mass shooters are angry. Schools know them as potential killers long before they kill. Domestic abusers are known to police before they escalate. If we had a reporting mechanism and intervention for these people, we could avoid so much carnage. THESE are the people who should not have guns.

Top
#306280 - 04/07/18 09:49 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: pondering_it_all]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
One responsive point, then a general observation. First, I think most mass murderers/shooters are functionally insane at the time they commit their murders. Functionally, although not legally. I would also agree that most threats, though not all, are identifiable before the worst action. I also agree that many (I can't qualify how many) do not reach the clinical or legal definitions of 'insane' before they act. It is why I don't think background checks, while useful, are sufficient to address the gun crisis.

Which leads to my second point: we need to address weapon functionality more broadly. I own a semi-automatic handgun that can fire 14 rounds before reloading. A second clip, and my skill (acquired through military training), would allow me to fire 27 rounds, relatively accurately, in about as many seconds. An AR-15, and similar assault weapons, are designed to do the same in even less time. There is no legitimate reason to allow such weapons, with such capacity in the civilian market.

Let me elaborate: in both cases a large volume of fire power can be unleashed in a very short period of time for one purpose only: killing a large number of human beings. In a typical shooting scenario involving trained police officers, several rounds are fired, but fewer than I believed:
Quote:
With LAC shootings involving only one officer, an average of 3.59 police rounds were fired. When 2 officers got involved, the average jumped to 4.98 rounds and with 3 officers or more to 6.48. "The number of rounds fired per officer increases in multiple-officer shootings by as much as 45 percent over single-officer shootings," Aveni says.
Study reveals important truths hidden in the details of officer-involved shootings - Police One. It surprised me, because I'm used to seeing stories that indicated officers emptied they clips (typically 10-rounds). Then I realized that the average is balanced by single-round encounters, and it made more sense.

My point is, that often the volume of fire represents, literally, "overkill". In a hunting scenario, three shots is overkill. Limiting weapons to 5-rounds, or even 10, would not impede necessary usage in virtually ANY scenario.

Top
#306282 - 04/08/18 03:05 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
By the way, one "use" for having arms under the Second Amendment can be eliminated entirely. It was never the intention of ANY of the founders/drafters of the Constitution and the Amendments to authorize insurrection against the government by means of "militias." People love to (mis)quote Jefferson in support of the notion. Fantasy arguments to the contrary are not based upon fact, law, or common sense.

I read a rather long "defense" earlier today, and although it was well laid out and thorough, it was premised upon such a fantasy. The argument was centered upon the assertion that "militias", as understood by the drafters, were groups of armed individuals not under the authority of any government. That argument is belied by nearly every document, record, law, history on the subject.

Top
#306283 - 04/08/18 04:39 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
Every "well-regulated" militia has a command structure, ending up at the state governors and then at the President. A militia without such a command structure is just an armed gang. Or maybe a lynch mob.

Anyone who decides they need to take up arms against the government of the US is not just a moron, they are insane and just about to die for their poor decision.

Top
#306284 - 04/08/18 04:53 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13119
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer


I read a rather long "defense" earlier today, and although it was well laid out and thorough, it was premised upon such a fantasy. The argument was centered upon the assertion that "militias", as understood by the drafters, were groups of armed individuals not under the authority of any government. That argument is belied by nearly every document, record, law, history on the subject.


You really should try to link the rest of us to that, if you can find it again. Please, it's unfair to reference it and make so many of us wish we could have read it.
So please share!
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#306285 - 04/08/18 11:00 AM Re: Gun Control [Re: NW Ponderer]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8785
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
The argument was centered upon the assertion that "militias", as understood by the drafters, were groups of armed individuals not under the authority of any government. That argument is belied by nearly every document, record, law, history on the subject.

Other parts of the Constitution itself belie that argument.
Art 1: Sec. 8; parts 15 and 16
Art.1: Sec. 10; part 3
Art. 2: Sec. 2; part 1
Art. 3: Sec. 3; part 1
2nd Amendment

Chiefly, it puts the Militia under the control of the President, and it does not authorize rebellion or insurrection. The only reference to arms is in connection to a well regulated militia.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#306286 - 04/08/18 12:15 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: logtroll]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Quote:
Chiefly, it puts the Militia under the control of the President

I think only after a request has been made of the federal government for designated states to provide a force of militia (or as it is known today, the NG).

An modern example: Mr Trump called on Gov Abbott of the great state of Texas to provide NG to assist the federal government with border security, solely the province of the federal government, and the provided NG would be under the supervision of the federal government.



Now I suppose Gov Abbott could have used the NG without any federal request to assist state authorities with border security, and they would be under his supervision. I think the NG was called up by Gov Abbott (as C-in-C of state NG) to successfully repel the invasion of federal troops during Operation Jade Helm.


Regarding anything to do with the Constitution is further "proof" of my conclusion, Conservatives only say they support the Constitution while the reality is they do not. Further I have concluded if there was a ratification vote today, they would reject the Constitution. Thus any argument based on Constitutional evidence, or historical facts are rejected as irrelevant. For additionally information read the majority and minority opinions of Heller. The author who is putatively origianalist does not make that argument, and the one who putatively rejects originalism, does make that argument.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#306287 - 04/08/18 02:41 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer


I read a rather long "defense" earlier today, and although it was well laid out and thorough, it was premised upon such a fantasy. The argument was centered upon the assertion that "militias", as understood by the drafters, were groups of armed individuals not under the authority of any government. That argument is belied by nearly every document, record, law, history on the subject.


You really should try to link the rest of us to that, if you can find it again. Please, it's unfair to reference it and make so many of us wish we could have read it.
So please share!
I wish I could. I do know that it was part of James Fallows' blog series from the Atlantic. I've tried to retrace my steps to find that particular one to no avail. Here's a link into the series. And, sure enough, as soon as I typed that I found it: Why Stop With the AR-15? Fallows addresses the "functionally equivalent" point directly.

I like that he generally posts the entire arguments of letter writers. Fallows is, I think, one of the best thinking journalists of our age, and fair.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#306293 - 04/09/18 05:59 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
That stuff is just another bogus argument. The second amendment is actually pretty clear. Here is the amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

The very first words; "A well regulated" applies. All the rest actually makes no difference to anything. There was once a big argument on 'Militia' and just what it means. The upshot of that one is that EVERYBODY is part of the Militia! All the rest is the same, ie. Don' mean a thing. However, "A well regulated" means, exactly, what it says. I have always found it interesting that the gun rights folks never seems to mention that one. The problem is that this is the controller. The supremes have never messed with that one, or gun regulation. As long as you are not taking all guns away the supremes seem to be giving gov the power to regulate the hell out of guns. I consider that to be plain, simple and easily understood, even by the dimmest amongst us. The gun rights folks just ignore it. What really bothers me is how media seems to let them do just that with nary a word. What bothers me even worse is anybody who lets one of these idiots get away with ignoring it. They constantly whine about their rights "under the second amendment" and promptly leave out the beginning. I actually heard one, the other day, say; "the second amendment does not allow government to regulate our guns!".

We seem to be in a place where "the other side" just doesn't get to argue but to lie, leave out, not talk about, and ignore any and all facts. My own thought is that WE have simply gone overboard on the both sides things. In this one we have one side that actually wants to support the second and the other wants to claim support whilst ignoring the text. This is, I think, just plain wrong.


Edited by jgw (04/09/18 06:02 PM)

Top
#306296 - 04/09/18 06:45 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7564
Loc: North San Diego County
Interesting idea: Does gun ownership itself make you subject to the command structure of the militia? The whole idea for the 2nd Amendment was that the government could "call up" (draft) citizens who were armed to put down insurrections and riots. So does the individual gun owner have the option of ignoring that call?

When we had the military draft, you didn't. Isn't the militia draft the same principle? If this was upheld by the courts, I wonder how many gun owners would decide they want to avoid the draft by giving up their weapons?

Top
#306300 - 04/09/18 08:49 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 292
Loc: Michigan, USA
Does gun ownership... I would say No. Though it is a very interesting idea - buy a particular class of weapon, report for training and duty with your states National Guard...

As I understand/remember it, in general, any male from 16 to 45 (65 in extreme cases) can be 'called up' in times of national emergencies. Though there are limiters, normally 18 to 45 can be drafted and a 17 year old can sign up with parental/guardian permission. This last is dictated by the specific draft law in force at the time which also would layout the exemptions. Anywho, our resident JAG if I am mistaken please correct.
_________________________
Vote 2018

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#306320 - 04/10/18 05:15 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15953
I think I've mentioned this before, but the real problem with the 2nd is the term "the people". In some instances, they meant individuals. In other uses, they intended it to mean "the people" generally, as in, the States. It seems clear that in this instance, given all of the other provisions of the Constitution, that "the people" meant the people collectively, not individually. A well-regulated militia, by definition, cannot be a "person" (except in Mel Gibson movies). The problem, of course, is that advocates prefer to take language "out of context" because it confuses the matter. Context is everything.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#306326 - 04/10/18 07:31 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6403
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Context ... it is worse than that.

I remember in the early 80's a gun nut at work wanted to educate me to the "real" meaning of the 2nd. His argument was some archaic grammatical sentence construction which proved his idea about gun rights. Seems strange as English grammar was not standardized until about 1850, implying one could not use the standardized grammar to analyze previous constructions. But if anyone of these clowns had read anything from colonial times they would have been familiar with the random grammatical constructions people used.

Common sense was the lens to interpret the context and meaning.

Common sense was probably not very common at any time, but much less so today.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#306332 - 04/10/18 09:29 PM Re: Gun Control [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1937
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Again - as far as I am concerned "well regulated" says its all. Arguments about Militia, etc. are just distractions for idiots who think that openly carrying military assault weapons, hand grenades, and artillery are a constitutional right. (sorry, probably went too far <sigh>)

Top
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 31 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2