Why pass new gun laws when we don't enforce existing laws?

[Lloyd]

There is no federal law requiring background evaluations. It’s stalled by the Republicans.

vile cowards

It will take the Cowboy Myth Movement Conservatives to say, “enough, we are going do without so others can live”.

Don't hold your breath. Most things each of us believes in is based on myths. Religion, which are the good societies and which aren't, justifications for past wars, many health policies, etc.


Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Chip]

An observation: Republicans have no problem with tagging illegal drugs as a proximate cause of overdose deaths and violent crime in general.

So why can't they apply the same logic to guns?

Three steps:

1) Remove liability protection for weapons makers and dealers, so they are subject to the same legal hazards as the rest of us.

2) Nationwide background checks with expanded terms.

3) Ban military-type assault weapons, magazine kits, bump stocks, and similar murderous accessories.

[TSherbs]

An observation: Republicans have no problem with tagging illegal drugs as a proximate cause of overdose deaths and violent crime in general.

So why can't they apply the same logic to guns?

Three steps:

1) Remove liability protection for weapons makers and dealers, so they are subject to the same legal hazards as the rest of us.

2) Nationwide background checks with expanded terms.

3) Ban military-type assault weapons, magazine kits, bumps stocks, and similar murderous accessories.

I favor all three of these steps. Pronto!

[Lloyd]

An observation: Republicans have no problem with tagging illegal drugs as a proximate cause of overdose deaths and violent crime in general.

So why can't they apply the same logic to guns?

Three steps:

1) Remove liability protection for weapons makers and dealers, so they are subject to the same legal hazards as the rest of us.

2) Nationwide background checks with expanded terms.

3) Ban military-type assault weapons, magazine kits, bumps stocks, and similar murderous accessories.

Based on the article Bold saw, fatherless men under 30 yo are a significant cause, too.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Bold2013]

To treat someone’s drug addiction it takes more than removing drugs (they will always find a way to get it). Deep multifaceted work needs to be done to treat the disease. Simultaneously work needs to be done to determine why they became addicts and how we can prevent people going done that road.

In others words. Thinking that background checks and gun control will fix the problem… is a myth.

[TSherbs]

To treat someone’s drug addiction it takes more than removing drugs (they will always find a way to get it). Deep multifaceted work needs to be done to treat the disease. Simultaneously work needs to be done to determine why they became addicts and how we can prevent people going done that road.

In others words. Thinking that background checks and gun control will fix the problem… is a myth.

Well, like with Roe v Wade, all we need to do is get three Supreme Court nominations in a row and then permit more gun ownership restrictions. It seems to be an approach that works for changing Constitutional rights. I may make gun-control one of the litmus tests for my future votes. We'll see.

[RobJohnson]

On the basis that it is bullets and not guns that kill and that gun control is a horse that has bolted would it not be possible to restrict the supply of bullets in some manner (for example through gun clubs only) and/or make them extremely expensive?

[TSherbs]

Based on the article Bold saw, fatherless men under 30 yo are a significant cause, too.

"cause"?

I don't think so.

Being male and under 30 is the strongest *correlation* for felony crime in America.

Being male, under 30, and in possession of a firearm is an even stronger correlation for felony violent crime.

Simply being male is the greatest common factor in all felony crime, mass murder included.

What we have in America is a threefold problem. We are unable (so far) to move forward on these three barriers to reform:

1) a true national discussion on what it means to be a healthy, functioning male, harmful neither to others nor to oneself

2) a true national discussion on the value of weapons of human destruction among our citizenry and relative ease of legally (and illegally) purchasing one

3) a break across entrenched political party lines that lately have become increasingly dug into opposing positions



Without movement in these areas, we are bound to wallow in this violent morass (IMO).

[Lloyd]

Based on the article Bold saw, fatherless men under 30 yo are a significant cause, too.

"cause"?

I don't think so.

I don't either. The article seemed to imply that conclusion via cherry-picking of data that otherwise couldn't support their argument.


Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Lloyd]

Great sense of humor, huh...
https://nypost.com/2022/05/30/florid...s-sheriff/amp/

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Enabling families are one factor behind these mass killings.

[Chip]

Like racism, gun-sickness is evidently a communicable disease.

[Chuck Naill]

A cordless drill or shop vac would be for fun and cost less.

[Chip]

The idea that laws restricting guns don't make a difference is a lie.

The Atrocity of American Gun Culture
After mass shootings like those in Uvalde and Buffalo, pro-gun officials say they don’t want to politicize tragedy. But the circumstances that allow for the mass murder of children are inherently political.

Two years ago, a study published in the journal Justice Quarterly examined the effects of gun laws in every state. Emma Fridel, an assistant professor of criminology at Florida State University, looked at gun-ownership rates and the proliferation of concealed-carry laws between 1991 and 2016. State lawmakers pushing for laxer laws have tended to argue that a more broadly armed public would serve as a deterrent to violence. Fridel found the opposite: gun-homicide rates in states with more permissive carry policies were eleven per cent higher than in states with stricter laws, and the probability of mass shootings increased by roughly fifty-three per cent in states with more gun ownership.

The most obvious indicator of the absurdist thinking on this subject can be seen in the fact that the latest massacre happened in Texas, a state that has more than eight thousand gun dealers, and where an estimated thirty-seven per cent of the population owns firearms. Last year, Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill that allowed most Texans to carry handguns without a license or mandatory training. This legislation did not prevent the Uvalde carnage any more than previous legislation allowing easier access to guns prevented the 2019 shooting that killed twenty-three people at an El Paso Walmart, or the 2017 attack in the town of Sutherland Springs, which took the lives of twenty-six worshippers in a rural church.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...an-gun-culture

[Chuck Naill]

Texans believe the Alamo was about Texas independence.

[TSherbs]

These guns are designed to put lethal holes in humans. And that is just what they are doing. In the same way that the protective armor, available to the public, is meant to stop bullets. And that is what it does.

So, a person can purchase and use these things for their exact functional purposes and go into schools and kill indiscriminately. Even predictably (statistically).

But we gotta protect that (unfettered) right, by golly! Regardless of the cost, apparently.

[Chuck Naill]

There is no reason for a non military person to own an assault rifle.

[TSherbs]

It gets argued that other tools, like hammers, knives, and cars can and are used to kill also. Yes, rocks have been used, crow bars, etc. But all those tools are designed for other purposes (except for some knives, which can be designed for cutting into human flesh in combat) and in nearly all cases, are used far less often in homicides. Only guns are being used exactly according to their functional purpose, and on a mass scale.

When will we get over our addiction and hold the purveyors of the drug responsible for the damage their trade does on the country?

[Chuck Naill]

It would be a challenge to kill 19 ten year olds and two teachers with a crow bar.

[dneal]

Suppose you pass a law to outlaw "assault weapons". The same ones the Obama CDC found that banning had no effect on anything, by the way... but say you do it. Then they use a Ruger Mini 14 that is also a 5.56mm semi-automatic with a 30 round magazine. Not outlawed, because it doesn't have black plastic bits. Then you outlaw those.

Then they use something else. Different caliber rifle, shotgun, handgun, whatever. Then you try to outlaw those, or all guns even.

Then your "common sense" gun reforms fail, not just because of the 2nd Amendment, which you won't get repealed; but because the majority of Americans don't favor it. But for argument's sake though, let's say you're successful.

Will deranged people no longer be able to kill children?