Page 13 of 21 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415161718192021 LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 313

Thread: Gun Control

  1. #181
    New Member
    Join Date
    10 Jan 16
    Location
    Seattle, WA, USA
    Posts
    7
    "Gun control doesn't work just like "gun free zones" don't work.

    The only way gun control will work is a total and complete ban of guns" --Gunnut-I could not disagree mote because:-

    I may have a perspective which is either center-left or Leftist, yet I'm a realist ! I know that the the attachment , the opponents of gun control and and any stringent and rational regulations governing gun-ownership, harbor towards the hallowed , sacrosanct and infallible IInd amendment , is more formidable than the umbilical cord tying the newborn babe to its mother.

    So even though it would be ideal, I am not suggesting banning of guns nor seizure of guns, like they have done in Australia. My ideas are mostly borne out by some of the recommendations made in the following article:-

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/...uce-gun-deaths

    The ideas written as a narrative and recommendations made which struck a cord with me are:-

    "I don’t think I’m being reductionist in describing the NRA’s position on gun safety as pretty basic: Guns are good; gun regulations are bad. That’s unfortunate because the key insight in the perpetually fruitless gun control debate is that our social problem is deaths from guns, not the guns from themselves.

    That distinction opens up the door to what I’ve always believed is the sanest approach to gun policy: a public health approach. What if we treated guns like cars, cribs and small electrical appliances? What if we focused less on the guns and more on when, where and why people get hurt or killed by them?

    Automobile safety is an encouraging example. America’s roads are much, much safer than they were a half century ago. We didn’t become anti-car. We didn’t take cars away (except for some chronic drunk drivers). We made cars and roads safer and minimized the situations in which Americans were most likely to kill themselves on the road.

    [Check out editorial cartoons about gun rights and gun control.]

    In 2010, the last year for which we have data, roughly 11,000 Americans died in gun homicides; 19,000 died by gun suicide; and 600 died from gun accidents – over 30,000 gun deaths a year. To put that in perspective, the faulty General Motors ignition switch at the heart of the current massive recall has been blamed for 13 deaths. Not 13,000. Not 130. Thirteen.

    Experts believe that a high proportion of gun deaths are preventable. David Hemenway, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, has been an advocate of the public health approach to gun deaths for decades. I first met him when I was writing about this subject for The Economist in the late 1990s. The NRA annual meeting prompted me to call Professor Hemenway and ask what his top three reforms would be if our goal were to reduce unnecessary gun deaths.

    Here are three sensible policy changes that would enable Americans to keep their guns and not die from them, too:

    Universal background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Unlike drugs, just about every gun starts out legal. (You can make heroin in the remote regions of Afghanistan; you can’t make a handgun that way.) Regulations that make it harder for legal guns to end up in the hands of criminals and psychopaths will make it less likely that those criminals or psychopaths rob or shoot the rest of us.
    More responsibility on the part of manufacturers for producing safer guns. The phrase “safer gun” may seem like an oxymoron; it’s not. There are many ways that gun technology can be improved to reduce inadvertent harm. Guns can be childproofed, so that young children cannot fire them. Guns can be equipped with “smart chips” so they cannot be fired by anyone but the owner. (This makes them both safer and less likely to be stolen.) Recording the unique ballistic fingerprint on every firearm would make it possible to trace any gun used in a crime back to its owner.
    Lean on gun dealers to do much more to prevent “straw purchases,” in which a person buys a gun legally with the express intent of passing it on to someone who cannot buy a gun legally (e.g. a convicted felon). We do not consider it acceptable for retailers to sell liquor to people who are underage. So why is this practice in the gun trade not more rigorously opposed, including by gun enthusiasts? Let me connect the dots: If it is harder for bad people to get guns, then fewer bad people will have guns. "

    However the recommendations made by Charles Wheeler the author of the above-article, forgets to make one very important recommendation which is :

    > Mandatory annual neuro-psychiatric evaluation before annual "concealed firearms permit" and "gun registrations" can be renewed. An evaluation which would be comprehensive enough to reveal any abnormal /significant decline in safety awareness, safety judgement, visuospatial perception abilities {not just confined to simple vision testion such as errors of refraction but also depth perception, retinal evaluation, visual figure versus ground distinguishing ability ,etc), hearing (both peripheral and central auditory ) evaluation, and gross and fine motor abilities of our fingers, hands, arms, etc }. When I become a responsible gun owner which I intend to become fairly soon, I do not mind to pay extra taxes to the Federal Govt and perhaps extra premium to the Health Insurance Provider (and I would prefer a single payer system similar to what they do in Ist world nations with socialized medicine--topic for debate on another thread :-) ) to enable the Federal Govt to pay for these evaluations and also subsidize based on an obvious means-tested sliding scale of income, for people who cannot afford to pay higher taxes or higher health insurance premiums.

    > Accelerate research in the Universities and research institutions of the US to fund more studies by Bio-mechanical Engineers (whose domain of research it would be) to constantly improve and evolve the "smart gun" technology and options.

    > Make the revocation of the immoral ban imposed by the Right-Wing sects of the Democratic party and the Republicans---legislative and executive branches of the Federal Govt --on public health organizations like the GA based CDC from conducting studies exploring co-relational or causal studies of public health hazard from gun ownership and gun use --permanent and irreversible !

    The above list is not exhaustive ! But lets make safer guns, and lets have stringent "concealed firearms permit" and "gun registration" annual permits and lets all enjoy gun use , abiding by and NOT infringing on the "divine" IInd amendment--worshiped and fiercely protected-- as though written in stone by none other than the seemingly omniscient and omnipotent DIVINE POWER -- and not human, fallible, legislators--even if they were our revered founding fathers !

  2. #182
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    FOR THE PURPOSE OF A WELL ORDERED MILITIA ...

    Not for fun, not for sport, not even for preparation in case the guy you didn't bother to vote against goes off like Adolph.

    Solely, deliberately, exclusively "For the purpose of a well ordered militia."

    Why?

    Because, that's where guns belong: in the hands of those focused on the security of the population.

    The rest is just late 20th century NRA mythology.
    Exact line

    "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."

    It does NOT DEFINE WHAT THE PEOPLE CAN OR CANNOT DO WITH THEIR ARMS.
    Chimo

  3. #183
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
    The above list is not exhaustive ! But lets make safer guns, and lets have stringent "concealed firearms permit" and "gun registration" annual permits and lets all enjoy gun use , abiding by and NOT infringing on the "divine" IInd amendment--worshiped and fiercely protected-- as though written in stone by none other than the seemingly omniscient and omnipotent DIVINE POWER -- and not human, fallible, legislators--even if they were our revered founding fathers !
    What part of that is not INFRINGING?
    Chimo

  4. #184
    A Self Important Senior Contributor troung's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    8,131
    When I become a responsible gun owner which I intend to become fairly soon, I do not mind to pay extra taxes to the Federal Govt and perhaps extra premium to the Health Insurance Provider (and I would prefer a single payer system similar to what they do in Ist world nations with socialized medicine--topic for debate on another thread
    I do.

    > Accelerate research in the Universities and research institutions of the US to fund more studies by Bio-mechanical Engineers (whose domain of research it would be) to constantly improve and evolve the "smart gun" technology and options.
    Waste of time and money.
    To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

  5. #185
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    FOR THE PURPOSE OF A WELL ORDERED MILITIA ...

    Not for fun, not for sport, not even for preparation in case the guy you didn't bother to vote against goes off like Adolph.

    Solely, deliberately, exclusively "For the purpose of a well ordered militia."

    Why?

    Because, that's where guns belong: in the hands of those focused on the security of the population.

    The rest is just late 20th century NRA mythology.

    Uhm NO

    Th world in which our Founders wrote the 2A had multiple reasons to own a gun. Indians, foreign troops, pirates, brigands and outlaws were all very real threats out side of the East Coast cities. The militia was a local organisation first and a state asset second. Most men in rural communities belonged to a militia. You defended your own farm or ran to your neighbors aid if he was attacked, if the threat was too big the call would go out locally then regionally all the way up the chain. Under the militia clause of the US Constitution the best definition of well regulated is that a militia have officers chosen from among its members by its members operating along lines defined by congress. Congress however has no authority to raise militias or arm them except when they are mustered into federal service. US Constitution Article 1 section 8 clauses 15 and 16.

  6. #186
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Monash View Post
    Err... the US constitution is a 'living document' by which I mean it has been and can be amended subject to the provisions set out in, is it Article 5? Its not the ten commandments i.e written in stone by God himself.
    Yes, it's a "living document." We have a process to accomplish that. It's spelt out in black and white in Article V of the US Constitution. We don't just arbitrarily change the Constitution whenever we feel like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Monash View Post
    I would suggest that if all firearms of all types were suddenly to be removed from any western nation there would very quickly be moves made to remove or severely restrict their use by Police. The only sticking point I can see is the continued risk of death/injuries due to edged weapons. Depending on the relevant 'incident rate' for assaults with knives and axes etc this might be managed by the use of tazers, mace and anti stab armor with firearms being removed from general duty officers. Alternatively it might still be necessary to have specialist armed response officers who can deal with incidents involving terrorism or situations where there are mentally ill or drug affected individuals who are acting aggressively while armed with blades etc.
    Yes, these specially armed police will be equipped with pikes and halberds and spears and swords to combat armored crooks and individuals under the influence. No guns necessary when bad guys don't have guns. We want "proportional" response. Giving police guns will just escalate the situation, prompting the bad guys to seek more powerful weapons. "De-escalation" is the best way to minimize casualties.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  7. #187
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    What do we think about registering journalists?

    http://www.thestate.com/news/politic...e55449025.html

    I'm totally for a "common sense and responsible journalism regulation" in this country.

    I am also for a "common sense voter registration and verification" in this country to prevent voter fraud.

    Our Constitutional rights and responsibilities have to be jealously guarded to make sure they remain in the hands of responsible and law abiding citizens.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  8. #188
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,434
    Obtaining a driver's license or a permit to operate heavy machinery requires an educational class, and passing a basic test to ensure the operator possesses a minimum level of competence. Why not treat firearms the same way?

    This wouldn't restrict who could own guns, but it ensures gun owners understand how to operate their firearms, and what kind of idiotic things will get you (or your child) injured or killed. Most injuries and fatalities with firearms are not actually a result of intentional violence, most are a result of ignorance, and education can fix that.

    As an avid shooter, it is astounding how frequently I see someone at the firing range trying to load a magazine with the bullets backwards, or trying to rack the slide with the barrel pointed at their stomach or another person. It takes me all of 5 minutes to show them how to operate their (usually new) firearm and explain the basics of firearm safety.

    These people aren't criminals or stupid, they are well meaning folks trying to protect themselves that just haven't been exposed to any firearm training. Mandating some basic education could go a long way towards producing more responsible gun owners, and eliminating a huge chunk of what become gun "statistics".

  9. #189
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Requiring fire arms training prior to owning a gun would be abused the same way may-issue concealed permits are abused. The right would be restricted to the politically or economically powerful and connected. Now I'm all in favor of mandatory fire arms safety classes in school, but it should not be a prerequisite for owning a gun.

  10. #190
    Senior Contributor bonehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 05
    Posts
    5,921
    Who we have in government office is far more important than "gun control" as far as public safety. Why is there no requirement for a civics class and test to be able to vote? People should be screaming for that.
    Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

  11. #191
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Requiring fire arms training prior to owning a gun would be abused the same way may-issue concealed permits are abused. The right would be restricted to the politically or economically powerful and connected. Now I'm all in favor of mandatory fire arms safety classes in school, but it should not be a prerequisite for owning a gun.
    I like the idea of including firearms safety in school classes. My concern is that so many people have no interest in owning a gun until they start a family, and suddenly have people they are responsible for protecting. How do we reach that demographic?

    These are the people that end up trying to figure it out on their own, and as a result end up with a negligent discharge or with a little kid getting a hold of a firearm and ending in tragedy.

    Any training as a prerequisite to gun ownership would have to be nationally standardized to prevent issues like you see with certain states being stingy with issuing CCLs or honoring permits from other states.

  12. #192
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    Obtaining a driver's license or a permit to operate heavy machinery requires an educational class, and passing a basic test to ensure the operator possesses a minimum level of competence. Why not treat firearms the same way?

    This wouldn't restrict who could own guns, but it ensures gun owners understand how to operate their firearms, and what kind of idiotic things will get you (or your child) injured or killed. Most injuries and fatalities with firearms are not actually a result of intentional violence, most are a result of ignorance, and education can fix that.

    As an avid shooter, it is astounding how frequently I see someone at the firing range trying to load a magazine with the bullets backwards, or trying to rack the slide with the barrel pointed at their stomach or another person. It takes me all of 5 minutes to show them how to operate their (usually new) firearm and explain the basics of firearm safety.

    These people aren't criminals or stupid, they are well meaning folks trying to protect themselves that just haven't been exposed to any firearm training. Mandating some basic education could go a long way towards producing more responsible gun owners, and eliminating a huge chunk of what become gun "statistics".
    One fundamental difference between guns and driving: gun ownership is a RIGHT while driving is a privilege.

    I'm all for some restrictions on our RIGHTS. Let's start with voter ID. But wait...that's just racist to require people to present an ID, any ID, to pick up a ballot to vote.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  13. #193
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    One fundamental difference between guns and driving: gun ownership is a RIGHT while driving is a privilege.

    I'm all for some restrictions on our RIGHTS. Let's start with voter ID. But wait...that's just racist to require people to present an ID, any ID, to pick up a ballot to vote.
    You are projecting an argument I'm not making.

    I'm fine with asking for an ID when voting. You already have to register anyhow.

    I'm also fine with holding gun owners to some minimum standard of education and responsibility.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 20 Jan 16, at 18:22.

  14. #194
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    You are projecting an argument I'm not making.

    I'm fine with asking for an ID when voting. You already have to register anyhow.

    I'm also fine with holding gun owners to some minimum standard of education and responsibility.
    I'll give that point as soon as we institute minimum standards of education and responsibility on the part of the voting public.

    It seems like all Constitutional rights are equal. Some are more equal than others.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  15. #195
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Well, I'm happy to report that at least my personal gun control has improved somewhat from last year, especially after I put in a suede grip for my ppq.

    double taps are snappy and easy, still trying to make point shooting more consistent...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Air traffic control
    By tankie in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 26 Jan 10,, 16:10
  2. Who would take control in this what if?
    By BudW in forum International Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 30 Dec 07,, 20:12
  3. US Keeps Control of Net
    By Julie in forum International Economy
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 19 Nov 05,, 15:28
  4. This is way out of control...
    By troung in forum International Economy
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 24 Jul 05,, 00:10
  5. Do we control the media or does it control us?
    By MaximumDefiance in forum International Economy
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 21 Aug 04,, 23:09

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •