NOT Gun Control

There is certainly a problem. But that problem has NOTHING to do with guns at all. This is being made to 'look' like it is though.

This is about a person being driven to the point of killing other people. Guns are merely the tools with which those killings were carried out.

Gun control laws will not fix these things. They can't. It isn't possible. They never have. They never will. It is not about guns.

Deal with the real issues. Concentrating on guns means ignoring the issues.
 
Well, so far it appears that status quo is the only path foreward. But there are many people that disagree.

Achieving perfection isn't going to happen. We have a big mess in this nation surrounding guns. The RTKBA has been championed at the expense of safety. Proliferation of firearm ownership has imbued us with 280 million guns. Attempting to oversee ownership of that many unregistered and untracked firearms is nigh impossible. Thus, places like Chicago that have strict gunlaws are unable to prevent black market sources for thugs and bangers. Erasing all gun laws would result in what?

It would seem that for some, if proposed actions, such as extensive background checks aren't 100 percent effective, then we shouldn't consider changing. Vetting gun ownership would be an uphill task, but it is not acceptable to me, that any deranged idiot can walk into a gun store and purchase a weapon capable of killing lots of people in a few moments. It also seems inappropriate that we have allowed sales of millions of said weapons as that proliferation has contributed immensely to the mess.
 
Achieving perfection isn't going to happen.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think anybody expects perfection. I think 26 guilty pleas and 62 prosecutions out of 76,000 denials falls well short of even "This system works reasonably well enough that we should use it as the framework for a system that will do four or five times as many transaction." And of course, expanding that system to all private sales would be require registration of all firearms or it would be completely unenforceable.

Vetting gun ownership would be an uphill task, but it is not acceptable to me, that any deranged idiot can walk into a gun store and purchase a weapon capable of killing lots of people in a few moments.
Click to expand...

So, in your view the same system that allows "any deranged idiot" to purchase a firearm must be immediately expanded to all private sales because we can't expect perfection?

It also seems inappropriate that we have allowed sales of millions of said weapons as that proliferation has contributed immensely to the mess.
Click to expand...

I disagree; but regardless that horse left the barn long ago. This year had well over 11 million new firearms manufactured. If tomorrow you implemented 100% perfect weapons control over every new purchase, that's still more than one unregistered firearm per person already out there.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, referring to me? I've been here since '09. Read some of my posts. No. Not an anti gun sleeper. Just someone who knows that the hammer is coming down soon. If we do not come up with a compromise, a set of "solutions" will be rammed down our throats. I suspect those solutions will include a renewal of the AWB and then some. Better start thinking and coming up with some palatable compromises.

BTW, if I am an anti-gun sleeper, then I can be one of our worst enemies.
 
How about regulating hammers, don’t they kill more ppl then legally owned guns?
See the problem isn’t with guns, it’s with ppl
The antidepressants that most of the massshooters were on have sideffects of homocide thoughts and urges, maybe the gov should focus in on that
 
Colorado Redneck said:
Well, so far it appears that status quo is the only path foreward. But there are many people that disagree.
Click to expand...
Why is status quo the only path forward? Why isn't fixing the broken existing system a path forward? The path forward should not be focused on guns. Guns are not the problem. Consider:

The worst school massacre in U.S. history was Bath Township, Michigan, in 1927. 44 dead, 58 injured. No guns involved. The weapon of choice was dynamite. The perp blew up half the school. The only reason the death toll wasn't much higher was that the charges he planted under the other wing of the school failed to explode.

Columbine: 15 dead and 21 injured. Did you know that the guns were not the primary weapons of choice? Plan A was propane bombs. When the bombs failed to detonate, the two losers resorted to Plan B, which was guns. If the bombs had gone off, the casualty count would have been much higher.

Look at all the truck and car attacks in Europe, and even in New York City.

Guns are not the problem, and that means focusing on guns is not the path forward. I'm sure you have heard or read that there are more than 20,000 gun laws in the U.S. I can't possibly verify or refute that statistic, but there are a lot. And yet we still have people killing other people. If 20,000 laws can't prevent it, what makes you think that 20,001 or even 20,003 will suddenly bring about a transformation of human nature and a miraculous cure for every nutcase in the United States who might wake up one morning thinking he wants to kill some people?

If you want the government to "do something," start demanding that they start fixing the system that's in place. Until we see it actually being used, nobody can honestly say it doesn't work.
 
I have to tell you that I now avoid, "gun free zones," like the plague. I go out of my way to make sure I am never in one of these, "kill zones."

Anyplace you can think of where one cannot legally carry - I avoid as much as possible. Gun free zone = target for psycho killer

That being said - I live within 20 miles of Parkland. On the day of the shooting, around lunchtime, I was eating at a Brazillian BBQ joint with a friend of mine, a mere 3 miles up the road from the Stoneman Douglas School.

This is the first mass shooting, "in my backyard, close to home," and I've been indescribably depressed and heartbroken for the victims all weekend.

I blame: The FBI. The Broward County Sheriff's Office. The School System.

We are beginning to be able to profile these mass shooters. We can now extrapolate people at extreme risk; we know who may be in serious and immediate need of mental health intervention.

Gun control disarms the law-abiding average citizen. The gangs will still have guns. The mass shooters will still have guns. The criminals, the violent nihilists, the supremacists etc will all still have guns. The Politicians, Celebrities, Ultra-Wealthy, will still all be protected by guns.

The only people who will not have guns under gun control are the law abiding people who will have no way to protect themselves from those who refuse to disarm.
 
Colorado Redneck said:
"
How so? Concealed carry laws have been loosened. Colorado wasted time legislating limits on magazine capacity. That was not smart. But the general statement about gun rights being impinged is difficult to validate. I would like to see how gun rights have been eroded.

Statement about kids dying in cars is true, but ignores the fact the many regulations and laws have improved automobile safety. Child car seat regulations are very strict, and as data provides opportunity to improve child safety in cars, laws are updated.

Improved and more detailed background checks, improved communication between agencies, and better coordination between states are things that I think could help decrease wing dings access to guns.
Click to expand...
Colorado wasted time but we still can't get those laws pulled back because the Dims still run all three branches here. It's annoying I have to go to a local gunshop to get proper capacity mags.

My kids go to school and I go to pick them up every other day. Every time it makes me mad because legally I have to disarm to get out of my car. So beyond stupid...
 
Onward Allusion said:
If we do not come up with a compromise, a set of "solutions" will be rammed down our throats.
Click to expand...

Expanded background checks under the current system require registration. Without it, the expanded checks are toothless and unenforceable. Registration is a necessary first step for the very solutions they plan to ram down our throats whether we compromise or not.

After Sandy Hook, Sen. Tom Coburn tried to propose a background check that applied to all private sales and still protected gun owner privacy. That bill never even got a vote on the Senate floor. You think there can be compromise here. I think you are wrong. The day after your compromise, they'll be back for more.

On a related note, I found this video of all the past gun control compromises. I think it sums up our prospects on future conpromises nicely.
 
Last edited:
Xandi--if you think I am an antigunner, your wrong. I am anti stupid. That being said, if you want this forum to be an echo chamber, where all members agree with you, then put on the blinkers and quit reading controversial threads.

I agree with Aguila Blanca, we need to fix the broken aspects of our current system of backgroynd checks and mental illness recognition. That essentially is what I think we need to do.

As to advocating gun control, keeping guns out of the hands of evil people is the objective that makes sense. The way we do things now hasn't been successful. More detailed background checks that are similar to pre-employment scans might be effective.

And lastly, to really make a dent in gun violence in places like Chicago, neighboring states will have to implement some draconian laws. If an SUV with a bunch of black market guns can drive in from Indiana, sell to gang bangers, drive back out of state, how can the city government expect to do much to thwart the wholesale murder happening now?

I have learned a few things reading the posts here.
 
So even though illegal drugs easily to come by (not using a tor browser) you think it’ll work with guns?
Evil finds a way
 
but it is not acceptable to me, that any deranged idiot can walk into a gun store and purchase a weapon capable of killing lots of people in a few moments.
Click to expand...

Just like any deranged idiot can buy gasoline, or worse, a car or a truck???

And just who decides who is, and isn't a deranged idiot??

Is it because someone is scared by their Facebook posts?? There are LEO professionals who's job it is to evaluate threats. Do they always get it right? NO. And if they don't what makes you think you will?? (and "you" is meant for whomever makes that decision in your system).

Perhaps we would be better off if all the potential deranged idiots were required by law to wear some kind of identifying marking? Like a yellow star, or a pink triangle???

As I recall, when that was done, it was justified as a public safety measure, as well....

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but really, how is discriminating against a group of people based on an opinion, rather than actual fact, a just and proper thing to do??

And the fact is that these millions of weapons shot and killed NO ONE, yesterday, or the day before (and if you're going to be specific about the AR15 type, its been on the civilian market for over 50 years), and won't tomorrow. But that's not good enough for some people.

one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different result. This seems to be the rut we are stuck in when it comes to gun control proposals.
 
I find this post disturbing. I come here to be safe from gun grabber jibberish.

Now we ourselves will start the argument for the liberals?

Good night
 
I used to work at a store that sold guns and I believe that a shall issue firearm owners license should be required that looks into all the above mentioned things, such as social media, criminal background, # of complaints and what types, etc.

I say this from all the experiences of people coming into the store who were confrontational, dangerously ignorant, just plain stupid, or actual criminals, or any combination of these things. Our right to bear arms is just as important a civil right as the others, however people are stupid and I think the bar should be set higher, the same way as there are restrictions on other rights when it comes to effecting other's lives.

Someone will make the argument that gun control is punishing the crime before the fact. However, unlike crimes that violate the other civil rights (speech, assembly, etc,) the crime when it comes to guns usually ends up with someone in the hospital or a morgue. No amount of lawsuits or trials can make up for death.

Also, for those who will make this argument, if you don't like the idea of the government looking into your medical history, social media, background and other information, they already can do this. Thanks NSA for keeping us all safe.

Remember, we should be open to debate; that is why we have a forum. Close mindedness and sticking to arguments you know are flawed does not help anything. I don't like liberals either but we should be willing to keep open ears about other's concerns.
 
Last edited:
Colarado Redneck said:
As to advocating gun control, keeping guns out of the hands of evil people is the objective that makes sense. The way we do things now hasn't been successful. More detailed background checks that are similar to pre-employment scans might be effective.
Click to expand...
Or not.

Do pre-employment scans show applicants who are voluntarily undergoing therapy? Or who perhaps should be in treatment, but aren't?

The Pulse nightclub shooter had a job ... as an armed security guard.

The Parkland shooter had a job.

The Las Vegas shooter was a millionaire accountant. He didn't work, but I'm sure if he had applied for a job at an accounting firm they would have hired him.

The San Bernardino shooter had a job.

Major Fort Hood shooter had a job.

What's so great about pre-employment screens as opposed to NICS?
 
Last edited:
44 AMP said:
one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different result. This seems to be the rut we are stuck in when it comes to gun control proposals.
Click to expand...
Okay, okay, the last 20,000 gun control laws we passed didn't quite do it. But the next one will tie it all up. Honest it will. I PROMise!
 
Okay, okay, the last 20,000 gun control laws we passed didn't quite do it. But the next one will tie it all up. Honest it will. I PROMise!
Click to expand...

Making the argument that a law might not be effective doesn't hold water; it's the same as saying we shouldn't bother posting speed limits for roads because you violated one on your way to work this morning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top