The right to bear arms

pretty crazy stats I just found: (https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp)
* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]

* In 1976, the Washington, D.C. City Council passed a law generally prohibiting residents from possessing handguns and requiring that all firearms in private homes be (1) kept unloaded and (2) rendered temporally inoperable via disassembly or installation of a trigger lock. The law became operative on Sept. 24, 1976.[33] [34]

* On June 26, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, struck down this law as unconstitutional.[35]

* During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower.[37]

* A 1997 U.S. Justice Department survey of 14,285 state prison inmates found that among those inmates who carried a firearm during the offense for which they were sent to jail, 0.7% obtained the firearm at a gun show, 1% at a flea market, 3.8% from a pawn shop, 8.3% from a retail store, 39.2% through an illegal/street source, and 39.6% through family or friends.[94]

* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[130]

mickeyrat said:

One locale does not reflect the articles proposition.

Simple. The article suggests or infers that its was the increase of guns sold that led to thid when in fact the % of gun owners is on the decline. You have less people buying the majority ofvthe guns.

So tell me, how does the same or roughly the same number of people biying guns reflect the decrease in crime? Vigilantes are they?

It fails to look at a broader scope of reasons. It may have played some kind of role but not in the way they portray it.

I would infer that if less people are buying guns but the same people are buying more guns and the crime rate is going way down than the legal gun owner in America is more responsible than ever.
Now I ve posted numerous articles, polls, statistical evidence, and Even came up with proposals to combat gun violence. What about you Einstein? Do you merely try to discredit/argue/pick apart everything I say/post or do you have an actual plan that is supported with either voter approval or statistical evidence? Or are you just firing from an emotional hip?
How can you dismiss the statistic that in 2000 nearly one million Americans used firearms to defend themselves and others from crime?

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

jennycoyle said:

I found myself debating this issue with the American actor Mark Pellegrino the other day, which was quite bizarre but when talking about something like this the concept of celebrity is somewhat redundant, he was just another person with strongly held opinions with which I happened to disagree. Anyway, his defence of the right to bear arms is his staunch belief that guns in the right hands (those of responsible law-abiding citizens) are a force for good. For example, he suggested that had such a citizen been present during the cinema shootings fewer people might have died. He gave another example in which someone drove their car into a café in Texas and then started shooting people. Apparently there was a woman in the café who could have stopped him, had she not left her gun in her car. He himself claims to have chased off a robber from his apartment block using his own legally held gun.

Now I'm quite a naive idealist and my general view would be that I'd like to get rid of all guns. I do realise how unrealistic this is though and so it can be quite hard to combat Mark's view that the very fact that this would be impossible is the reason why it's so important for citizens to have the right to arm themselves.

Even if we then say ok we at least need better background checks, we all know that if someone wants a gun they'll find a way to get one. Sure all the kids have to do is take their parents guns, as I believe happened with a number of the school shootings.

So what's the answer???

Registration of all sales with serial # attached (there is a reason guns have them).
Universal backround checks for all sales.
Every weapon submits its "fingerprint" which is the bullet fired from it to FBI for cataloging. When that weapon is later used in crime and proven so , that person is held accountable. You no longer own that weapon for whatever reason and not inform authorities? Tough shit. You go to jail too.

parents of kids who steal the parents guns for crime are charged with same charges as kids.

Extensive training for each owner with regular retesting or recertification (thats what "well regulated militia " means in that amendment).

No more ccw "reciprocity" between states. you dont live in my state and want to carry here? Certify here.

Weapons ARE tools. Designed with the intent to cause bodily harm up to and including death. The seriousness of this fact as it applies to wider society far outweighs your haphazard, inapporiate storage and handling if these tools. If you cant show on a regular basis safe practice in all aspects of ownership then buy a bat or other means of protection.

Had hoped this might garner some kind of comment.

Think it got lost amongst the critically important album rankings convo.

Solution enough? Einstein?

Parents of kids who "steal" their parents guns should be charged with the same crime? That s a solution? Are you kidding me? My kid borrows my car, gets drunk and kills a person and I go to jail?
No more ccw between states? Perhaps let s go with individual state liscense too; meaning, I have a nj liscense and I need to drive in Pennsylvania I need to pass their test.
Initial training cool but regular retesting? That s a little much.
How do you prove regular practice safe practice?
You don't report a gun stolen and you go to jail too? Wtf? How did that person do anything wrong? A lot of people don't report crimes and don't go to jail. Give me a break.
Otherwise I m good with registration, initial education and ballistic s
fingerprinting. I get the same crime charged to me as my kids? Yeah no way.

Last-12-Exit said:

Thank god that mickeyrat is as smart as mcgruff. Otherwise he'd have nobody to debate with.

I am not converting anything. I know 2 people who have converted semi auto weapons to fully auto. One was an ak47. I do not remember what the other one was.

My uncle and cousin, who converted the ak47, said that it wasn't a difficult process at all. My only question was why do it? Their response was "because we could."

You openly admit to someone committing a felony, a FELONY. Who's smart?!?

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

jennycoyle said:

I found myself debating this issue with the American actor Mark Pellegrino the other day, which was quite bizarre but when talking about something like this the concept of celebrity is somewhat redundant, he was just another person with strongly held opinions with which I happened to disagree. Anyway, his defence of the right to bear arms is his staunch belief that guns in the right hands (those of responsible law-abiding citizens) are a force for good. For example, he suggested that had such a citizen been present during the cinema shootings fewer people might have died. He gave another example in which someone drove their car into a café in Texas and then started shooting people. Apparently there was a woman in the café who could have stopped him, had she not left her gun in her car. He himself claims to have chased off a robber from his apartment block using his own legally held gun.

Now I'm quite a naive idealist and my general view would be that I'd like to get rid of all guns. I do realise how unrealistic this is though and so it can be quite hard to combat Mark's view that the very fact that this would be impossible is the reason why it's so important for citizens to have the right to arm themselves.

Even if we then say ok we at least need better background checks, we all know that if someone wants a gun they'll find a way to get one. Sure all the kids have to do is take their parents guns, as I believe happened with a number of the school shootings.

So what's the answer???

Registration of all sales with serial # attached (there is a reason guns have them).
Universal backround checks for all sales.
Every weapon submits its "fingerprint" which is the bullet fired from it to FBI for cataloging. When that weapon is later used in crime and proven so , that person is held accountable. You no longer own that weapon for whatever reason and not inform authorities? Tough shit. You go to jail too.

parents of kids who steal the parents guns for crime are charged with same charges as kids.

Extensive training for each owner with regular retesting or recertification (thats what "well regulated militia " means in that amendment).

No more ccw "reciprocity" between states. you dont live in my state and want to carry here? Certify here.

Weapons ARE tools. Designed with the intent to cause bodily harm up to and including death. The seriousness of this fact as it applies to wider society far outweighs your haphazard, inapporiate storage and handling if these tools. If you cant show on a regular basis safe practice in all aspects of ownership then buy a bat or other means of protection.

Had hoped this might garner some kind of comment.

Think it got lost amongst the critically important album rankings convo.

Solution enough? Einstein?

Parents of kids who "steal" their parents guns should be charged with the same crime? That s a solution? Are you kidding me? My kid borrows my car, gets drunk and kills a person and I go to jail?
No more ccw between states? Perhaps let s go with individual state liscense too; meaning, I have a nj liscense and I need to drive in Pennsylvania I need to pass their test.
Initial training cool but regular retesting? That s a little much.
How do you prove regular practice safe practice?
You don't report a gun stolen and you go to jail too? Wtf? How did that person do anything wrong? A lot of people don't report crimes and don't go to jail. Give me a break.
Otherwise I m good with registration, initial education and ballistic s
fingerprinting. I get the same crime charged to me as my kids? Yeah no way.

Same answer for the kids and nonreporting. It is then shown that securement is an issue. RESPONSIBLE owners secure AND know where their weapons are.

We can agree black market guns are an issue. And some come from thefts. I believe this helps address this

If you have knowledge your house was broken into and you fail to check your weapons? Or report? You are complicit in any crime that results UNLESS you have reported missing.

Recent case related to your analogy. Father allowed daughter 15 yrs old to use his SUV on vacation. She picked up others. She now has to deal with the fact her reckless driving killed three passengers .it wasnt the first time dad allowed her to drive.
http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2014/12/17/eastchester-father-daughter-charged-pennsylvania-triple-fatal/20547103/

Dad was charged too pled guilty. Searching for sentence handed down.


Edit. Found it. 6 1/5 to 16 for dad. 3 young lives gone.

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2015/08/20/fatal-crash-ware-sentenced/31936621/

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

jennycoyle said:

I found myself debating this issue with the American actor Mark Pellegrino the other day, which was quite bizarre but when talking about something like this the concept of celebrity is somewhat redundant, he was just another person with strongly held opinions with which I happened to disagree. Anyway, his defence of the right to bear arms is his staunch belief that guns in the right hands (those of responsible law-abiding citizens) are a force for good. For example, he suggested that had such a citizen been present during the cinema shootings fewer people might have died. He gave another example in which someone drove their car into a café in Texas and then started shooting people. Apparently there was a woman in the café who could have stopped him, had she not left her gun in her car. He himself claims to have chased off a robber from his apartment block using his own legally held gun.

Now I'm quite a naive idealist and my general view would be that I'd like to get rid of all guns. I do realise how unrealistic this is though and so it can be quite hard to combat Mark's view that the very fact that this would be impossible is the reason why it's so important for citizens to have the right to arm themselves.

Even if we then say ok we at least need better background checks, we all know that if someone wants a gun they'll find a way to get one. Sure all the kids have to do is take their parents guns, as I believe happened with a number of the school shootings.

So what's the answer???

Registration of all sales with serial # attached (there is a reason guns have them).
Universal backround checks for all sales.
Every weapon submits its "fingerprint" which is the bullet fired from it to FBI for cataloging. When that weapon is later used in crime and proven so , that person is held accountable. You no longer own that weapon for whatever reason and not inform authorities? Tough shit. You go to jail too.

parents of kids who steal the parents guns for crime are charged with same charges as kids.

Extensive training for each owner with regular retesting or recertification (thats what "well regulated militia " means in that amendment).

No more ccw "reciprocity" between states. you dont live in my state and want to carry here? Certify here.

Weapons ARE tools. Designed with the intent to cause bodily harm up to and including death. The seriousness of this fact as it applies to wider society far outweighs your haphazard, inapporiate storage and handling if these tools. If you cant show on a regular basis safe practice in all aspects of ownership then buy a bat or other means of protection.

Had hoped this might garner some kind of comment.

Think it got lost amongst the critically important album rankings convo.

Solution enough? Einstein?

Parents of kids who "steal" their parents guns should be charged with the same crime? That s a solution? Are you kidding me? My kid borrows my car, gets drunk and kills a person and I go to jail?
No more ccw between states? Perhaps let s go with individual state liscense too; meaning, I have a nj liscense and I need to drive in Pennsylvania I need to pass their test.
Initial training cool but regular retesting? That s a little much.
How do you prove regular practice safe practice?
You don't report a gun stolen and you go to jail too? Wtf? How did that person do anything wrong? A lot of people don't report crimes and don't go to jail. Give me a break.
Otherwise I m good with registration, initial education and ballistic s
fingerprinting. I get the same crime charged to me as my kids? Yeah no way.

Same answer for the kids and nonreporting. It is then shown that securement is an issue. RESPONSIBLE owners secure AND know where their weapons are.

We can agree black market guns are an issue. And some come from thefts. I believe this helps address this

If you have knowledge your house was broken into and you fail to check your weapons? Or report? You are complicit in any crime that results UNLESS you have reported missing.

Recent case related to your analogy. Father allowed daughter 15 yrs old to use his SUV on vacation. She picked up others. She now has to deal with the fact her reckless driving killed three passengers .it wasnt the first time dad allowed her to drive.
http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2014/12/17/eastchester-father-daughter-charged-pennsylvania-triple-fatal/20547103/

Dad was charged too pled guilty. Searching for sentence handed down.


Edit. Found it. 6 1/5 to 16 for dad. 3 young lives gone.

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2015/08/20/fatal-crash-ware-sentenced/31936621/

I hope to God parents never have to deal with a kid who got drunk on their own liquor and crashed their car even though it s against the law.

Imagine that, individuals accepting responsibility for breaking the law.

and for the record the daughter was unlicensed. big difference. that's why the dad went to jail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXrNj3t6Vxo

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Parents of kids who "steal" their parents guns should be charged with the same crime? That s a solution? Are you kidding me? My kid borrows my car, gets drunk and kills a person and I go to jail?
No more ccw between states? Perhaps let s go with individual state liscense too; meaning, I have a nj liscense and I need to drive in Pennsylvania I need to pass their test.
Initial training cool but regular retesting? That s a little much.
How do you prove regular practice safe practice?
You don't report a gun stolen and you go to jail too? Wtf? How did that person do anything wrong? A lot of people don't report crimes and don't go to jail. Give me a break.
Otherwise I m good with registration, initial education and ballistic s
fingerprinting. I get the same crime charged to me as my kids? Yeah no way.

Again I agree with you! We're on a roll. Parents being charged for their kids' crimes. Unless the parents had a direct hand in their actions or knew about their plans ahead of time and failed to try and stop them, I completely disagree with this tactic generally. It really bothers me that it seems to be an idea that's taken seriously by a lot of people, including some lawmakers.

Unsecured weapons in a household with minors. You dont think a parent bears some kind of criminal responibility if it is then taken by a minor child and a crime is commited?

mickeyrat said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

Parents of kids who "steal" their parents guns should be charged with the same crime? That s a solution? Are you kidding me? My kid borrows my car, gets drunk and kills a person and I go to jail?
No more ccw between states? Perhaps let s go with individual state liscense too; meaning, I have a nj liscense and I need to drive in Pennsylvania I need to pass their test.
Initial training cool but regular retesting? That s a little much.
How do you prove regular practice safe practice?
You don't report a gun stolen and you go to jail too? Wtf? How did that person do anything wrong? A lot of people don't report crimes and don't go to jail. Give me a break.
Otherwise I m good with registration, initial education and ballistic s
fingerprinting. I get the same crime charged to me as my kids? Yeah no way.

Again I agree with you! We're on a roll. Parents being charged for their kids' crimes. Unless the parents had a direct hand in their actions or knew about their plans ahead of time and failed to try and stop them, I completely disagree with this tactic generally. It really bothers me that it seems to be an idea that's taken seriously by a lot of people, including some lawmakers.

Unsecured weapons in a household with minors. You dont think a parent bears some kind of criminal responibility if it is then taken by a minor child and a crime is commited?

There was one case in that Requiem for the Dead documentary where a kid accidentally shot his friend with a gun his father kept under his bed. The father kept at least 6 guns UNDER HIS BED. That father has to accept some responsibility surely?

ldent42 said:

I dunno about that. It opens a door to a whole other side of the law regarding shit like assault or even murder with household objects. I mean the minor would get a PINS for sure so thats already a punishment on the parents - in cases where the gun is not secured they should get charged with a fine or something for having the weapon not secured or charged with a child endangerment.

But I don't think it's a good idea to have the father do hard time cuz his kid stole his gun and shot someone by accident. He should be held responsible for having the gun unsecured and then an extra punishment for having the gun unsecured in a home with children. But he shouldn't be charged with the murder of the kid.

Well no I wouldn't suggest that. I'd be happy if they just took away his right to own guns. It was a tragic case, no intent at all but something has to be done to prevent further tragedies like that happening. If people are going to insist on the right to bear arms then the least they can do is be responsible about it and not endanger innocent lives