quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Accidental deaths is more of a "people are too fucking stupid to own a paint ball gun let alone a real one," problem, but since we cannot test for "stupid" prior to selling someone a gun, leave it to natural selection, or perhaps a mandatory training program before one can purchase a gun, and maybe civil or criminal liability laws if someone is too stupid to put the damn things where they wont be accidentally discharged.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Accidental deaths is more of a "people are too fucking stupid to own a paint ball gun let alone a real one," problem, but since we cannot test for "stupid" prior to selling someone a gun, leave it to natural selection, or perhaps a mandatory training program before one can purchase a gun, and maybe civil or criminal liability laws if someone is too stupid to put the damn things where they wont be accidentally discharged.

I don't know if it is still the case, but I know that Alabama used to require a hunter safety course before issuing a hunting license to minors that accompanied adults on hunts. I have often wondered why something like that was not a requirement for obtaining a gun permit-completion of a safety course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, JLF. Is it that guns aren't the problem - but that Americans just like killing each other and themselves - and this is made efficacious by the widespread availability of such an excellently handy instrument of killing, as indeed the gun is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The problem is the right can not handle the conservation in a mature manner. I've tried several times to find middle ground. Tried to suggest we test all the myths and sayings scientifically. Even explained how that process might work. Pointed out that as mass shootings become more common place, more people will side with the 'ban 'em all' crowd rather than 'defend the 2nd'.

Its fanaticism plain and simple. They reject reason, knowledge, common sense, or even being human. I dare say they suffer from any of the following: paranoia, schizophrenia, 'anger management issues', loneliness, bad diets, and listening to rightwing media. The last one basically programming their viewpoints with a mixture of behavioral processes usually used on trauma victims (i.e. NLP). Over twenty years, these people are basically conditioned to think as other want them to think. Particularly on firearms.

The thought of not having a firearms is so painful of a sensation, that it overrides all other functions in the mind. Basically heroine addicts and alcoholics suffer much less in comparison. That they will fight to have a gun. Regardless of how insane or silly their argument becomes.

Twenty little children were butchered in Sandy Hook a few years back. Ten times that amount could be killed, and many of these people would fight against any sort of laws or restrictions. Most non-gun nut folks would be horrified of such a level of destruction and give politicians two choices: better firearm laws or the hangman's noose. They are not psychotic. Gun nuts do show emotion and plenty of it. But even that level of destruction. That the guns were easy to obtained. It doesn't take much practice to kill many with a gun (verse say, a katana). To them, they would take the opposite reaction to such destruction. Rather than realize things should change, they demand things are made....EASIER...for future attacks to take place.

That's irrational behavior!

We'll have another mass shooting in about 3-4 weeks from now if we are lucky. Nothing will change until something....monstrous....takes place. Something that pales Sandy Hook by comparison. Gun nut's minds will not be changed. Fortunately, the 'non gun nut' population outweighs them by a very large percentage. If we wanted the laws to be changed, they'll get changed. There are many things we could do to allow gun owners (the rational folks who are not gun nuts) to have the same access to firearms (more or less); while at the same time, drastically reducing firearms falling into the wrong hands. Could cut down many shootings in the nation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The problem is the right can not handle the conservation in a mature manner. I've tried several times to find middle ground. Tried to suggest we test all the myths and sayings scientifically. Even explained how that process might work. Pointed out that as mass shootings become more common place, more people will side with the 'ban 'em all' crowd rather than 'defend the 2nd'.

Its fanaticism plain and simple. They reject reason, knowledge, common sense, or even being human. I dare say they suffer from any of the following: paranoia, schizophrenia, 'anger management issues', loneliness, bad diets, and listening to rightwing media. The last one basically programming their viewpoints with a mixture of behavioral processes usually used on trauma victims (i.e. NLP). Over twenty years, these people are basically conditioned to think as other want them to think. Particularly on firearms.

The thought of not having a firearms is so painful of a sensation, that it overrides all other functions in the mind. Basically heroine addicts and alcoholics suffer much less in comparison. That they will fight to have a gun. Regardless of how insane or silly their argument becomes.

Twenty little children were butchered in Sandy Hook a few years back. Ten times that amount could be killed, and many of these people would fight against any sort of laws or restrictions. Most non-gun nut folks would be horrified of such a level of destruction and give politicians two choices: better firearm laws or the hangman's noose. They are not psychotic. Gun nuts do show emotion and plenty of it. But even that level of destruction. That the guns were easy to obtained. It doesn't take much practice to kill many with a gun (verse say, a katana). To them, they would take the opposite reaction to such destruction. Rather than realize things should change, they demand things are made....EASIER...for future attacks to take place.

That's irrational behavior!

We'll have another mass shooting in about 3-4 weeks from now if we are lucky. Nothing will change until something....monstrous....takes place. Something that pales Sandy Hook by comparison. Gun nut's minds will not be changed. Fortunately, the 'non gun nut' population outweighs them by a very large percentage. If we wanted the laws to be changed, they'll get changed. There are many things we could do to allow gun owners (the rational folks who are not gun nuts) to have the same access to firearms (more or less); while at the same time, drastically reducing firearms falling into the wrong hands. Could cut down many shootings in the nation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The problem is the right can not handle the conservation in a mature manner. I've tried several times to find middle ground. Tried to suggest we test all the myths and sayings scientifically. Even explained how that process might work. Pointed out that as mass shootings become more common place, more people will side with the 'ban 'em all' crowd rather than 'defend the 2nd'.

Its fanaticism plain and simple. They reject reason, knowledge, common sense, or even being human. I dare say they suffer from any of the following: paranoia, schizophrenia, 'anger management issues', loneliness, bad diets, and listening to rightwing media. The last one basically programming their viewpoints with a mixture of behavioral processes usually used on trauma victims (i.e. NLP). Over twenty years, these people are basically conditioned to think as other want them to think. Particularly on firearms.

The thought of not having a firearms is so painful of a sensation, that it overrides all other functions in the mind. Basically heroine addicts and alcoholics suffer much less in comparison. That they will fight to have a gun. Regardless of how insane or silly their argument becomes.

Twenty little children were butchered in Sandy Hook a few years back. Ten times that amount could be killed, and many of these people would fight against any sort of laws or restrictions. Most non-gun nut folks would be horrified of such a level of destruction and give politicians two choices: better firearm laws or the hangman's noose. They are not psychotic. Gun nuts do show emotion and plenty of it. But even that level of destruction. That the guns were easy to obtained. It doesn't take much practice to kill many with a gun (verse say, a katana). To them, they would take the opposite reaction to such destruction. Rather than realize things should change, they demand things are made....EASIER...for future attacks to take place.

That's irrational behavior!

We'll have another mass shooting in about 3-4 weeks from now if we are lucky. Nothing will change until something....monstrous....takes place. Something that pales Sandy Hook by comparison. Gun nut's minds will not be changed. Fortunately, the 'non gun nut' population outweighs them by a very large percentage. If we wanted the laws to be changed, they'll get changed. There are many things we could do to allow gun owners (the rational folks who are not gun nuts) to have the same access to firearms (more or less); while at the same time, drastically reducing firearms falling into the wrong hands. Could cut down many shootings in the nation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Pretty much we all know this. Guns are fucking deadly, killing about 30K people a year.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Saw a meme last week:

Ban Abortions!
Ban Gay Marriage!
Ban Immigration!
...but banning guns won't work, because people will find a way.

Now, no one's asking to ban guns, simply pursue logical regulation common in civilized countries.
But the meme does highlight (if only by parody) the myopia of the circle-the-wagons-gun-defense paranoia.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Pretty much we all know this. Guns are fucking deadly, killing about 30K people a year.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Saw a meme last week:

Ban Abortions!
Ban Gay Marriage!
Ban Immigration!
...but banning guns won't work, because people will find a way.

Now, no one's asking to ban guns, simply pursue logical regulation common in civilized countries.
But the meme does highlight (if only by parody) the myopia of the circle-the-wagons-gun-defense paranoia.

Do you even read what some of the anti gun people post in these pages?

Few suggest a look at the existing laws to fix them, most point out that if guns were impossible to get ahold of, mass shootings wont happen.

The majority post statistics that not only include criminal acts, but suicides and accidents, then inflate the number by however many points the source came up with.

Then of course you have the ones that make it clear that from their point of view all gun owners are responsible for the whatever happened, that a specific weapon or type of weapon is the problem, so "ban" or "restriction" is the only logical answer.

First of all, the "restriction" aspect has been covered by existing laws, the problem comes into focus when you look at enforcement, or even getting the information collected to prevent the purchase in the first place.

All of the flags under the "restriction of purchase" regulations should pop up with the current back ground checks required. This means that the NCIS as well as two other data bases should have the information readily available.

The operative word here is "should."

Here is why they dont work. The NCIS system is underfunded, poorly maintained, and the fact that there is no funding available to fix the problems are a direct result in the fact that funds have been budgeted, but never fully allocated.

You want the problems fixed, the solution is easy. Get people elected that will fix the current problems and not create a shit ton more by writing legislation that further complicate the fucking situation.

Stop talking to the so called experts and talk to the people that have to actually make the current laws work and ask them what the problems are.

As I said before, you are looking at a government body that takes a simple little problem that barely requires a page to write a solution and then complicates to the point of needing a thousand pages of bullshit that not even the people who wrote it understand.