America's Gun Violence

mace1229 said:

CM189191 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

It wasn't a deliberately defiant practice... it was lack of knowledge.

Another responsible gun owner! Maybe some sort of mandatory gun safety training would be appropriate?

Although I wouldn't be completely opposed to that, that also sums up what many see as the problem with gun control.
It doesn't resolve anything.
Most gun deaths are suicide, gun safety won't prevent that.
Most violent crimes committed with a gun, the gun was obtained illegally. Gun safety won't solve that either.
And then there's the big debate on assault rifles, magazine limits, a forward stock etc, that does nothing to prevent it either.

Gun control should focus on mental health and cracking down on the laws that already exist. If we could help the mentally ill, and keep guns out of the hands of criminal, that would solve 95% (yes, that is a made-up stat, my point is it would solve the vast majority) of gun deaths. But we ignore the mental health, and if you crack down on gangs then you're racist nowadays. 
So unfortunately that is never the case, politicians make their careers by banning weapons that aren't used in crimes, making focusing on gun policy that doesn't address the real problems with guns and talking big about the NRA.

RiotZact said:

In their defense I do live in Pennsyltucky, or northern West Virginia as I like to call it. So their experience is likely one extreme and mine is the other, so the average and the reality is somewhere in the middle. 

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

I agree it's totally stupid to say that guns bought for protection should be locked up. If they're locked up with the ammo kept separate then they aren't really for home defense anymore, so what's the point? Gun advocates know that. They just spew that shit as a defense mechanism.

I advocate locking the gun and ammo/magazine in a quick access biometric or coded pistol safe.  Those can be accessed in less than 5 seconds if needed.  
Most gun owners I know do this, if for nothing else, to keep them from being stolen.
You are not going to get rid of guns, so educating more on the appropriate storage/usage and possible consequences for being irresponsible is imperative.   

Maybe we need some new laws??? 
Quite a departure from the classic "we just need to enforce the laws we have".

And who is going to make and how will they enforce these "new laws"?  What new laws would you create that would curb gun violence in cities like Chicago?

I wasn't commenting on gang violence in Chicago, I was commenting on the topic of secure and safe storage.
I think the Congressional houses should come together for some laws that would criminalize unsafe storage and set punishments for firearms finding their way into children's hands and firearms being stolen.

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

CM189191 said:

mace1229 said:

CM189191 said:

mace1229 said:

CM189191 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

It wasn't a deliberately defiant practice... it was lack of knowledge.

Another responsible gun owner! Maybe some sort of mandatory gun safety training would be appropriate?

Although I wouldn't be completely opposed to that, that also sums up what many see as the problem with gun control.
It doesn't resolve anything.
Most gun deaths are suicide, gun safety won't prevent that.
Most violent crimes committed with a gun, the gun was obtained illegally. Gun safety won't solve that either.
And then there's the big debate on assault rifles, magazine limits, a forward stock etc, that does nothing to prevent it either.

Gun control should focus on mental health and cracking down on the laws that already exist. If we could help the mentally ill, and keep guns out of the hands of criminal, that would solve 95% (yes, that is a made-up stat, my point is it would solve the vast majority) of gun deaths. But we ignore the mental health, and if you crack down on gangs then you're racist nowadays. 
So unfortunately that is never the case, politicians make their careers by banning weapons that aren't used in crimes, making focusing on gun policy that doesn't address the real problems with guns and talking big about the NRA.

Why not both?  If 60% of gun deaths are suicides, that doesn't mean we ignore the other 40%.

Why isn't the gun lobby promoting mental health care to help solve the problem?  Instead they're focusing on defeating laws that would restrict firearm ownership to the mentally unstable.  

Yes, but the "other" isn't 40%. The "other" is really closer to 5-10%
And by other, I am referring to non-suicides or crimes with legally owned guns. Essentially illegally owned guns and suicides make up far more than half gun crimes.
Its hard to find an exact figure, but based on the definition used most sources will claim somewhere between like 50-95% of violent gun crimes are with illegal guns. The range is so big because of the definition of "illegally owned." If you go strictly by a gun that was purchased on the black market or other illegal means, then it is closer to the 50%. If you go with anyone who should not even be in possession of a firearm because of a felony conviction or any other reason, then it jumps to 90-95%. That latter definition makes more sense, because it was illegally possessed.
So solving the illegal gun market and mental health will solve 95% of the gun problem. So why is it than nearly none of the gun legislature will focus on it? That's why anti-gun lobbyist are sometimes viewed as caring more about their anti-gun image than actually solving anything.
That's why it seems pointless to introduce more gun legislature, because if we just focused on the gun laws we already have there would be a dramatic decrease. And since 90% of gun crimes are with illegal guns, new gun legislature won;t have an impact on those committing the crimes.

Its like being on the Titanic and trying to fix a leaky gasket on rudder arm and completely ignoring the gaping hole that will sink the ship in 90 minutes.

not what I said. I've rephrased it about 3 times now and it keeps getting ignored, or some irrelevant meme posted instead.
Why do the majority of anti-gun lobbyists and law makers focus on laws that impact only 5-10% of the problem, and ignore the 90% ?

No where did I state it can't be solved. But it wont be solved by focusing on the wrong issues and ignore mental illness, gangs and other criminals with guns.

So are you going to rephrase what I said and twist it into something I didn't say, post another meme, or respond to my point?

As I said, suicides make up about half of gun deaths. Criminals make up most of the other half. Why do gun laws focus on assault rifles (which is about 1%) and high capacity mags far more than anything else?
I'm not necessarily against some restrictions on those. I just also believe they are meaningless if you don't impact the bigger problem. We used to be good an helping those with mental illness, but not anymore. Better programs for that first. Violent offenders and known gang affiliates should lose some rights, stop and search should be allowed for anyone flying gang colors. That is one images I had when I said gang crackdown will lead to racial criticism. But in my view, if you chose to join a violent gang and chose to advertise it, then that is the choice you made. I dont give a crap fif you get stopped 100 times on the way to the grocery store.

Are you sure criminals make up the other half? Are those the illegal guns, the convicted criminals that shouldn't be in possession of guns or law abiding responsible gun owners until they're not who make up the criminals responsible for the other half of gun deaths?

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

I agree it's totally stupid to say that guns bought for protection should be locked up. If they're locked up with the ammo kept separate then they aren't really for home defense anymore, so what's the point? Gun advocates know that. They just spew that shit as a defense mechanism.

I advocate locking the gun and ammo/magazine in a quick access biometric or coded pistol safe.  Those can be accessed in less than 5 seconds if needed.  
Most gun owners I know do this, if for nothing else, to keep them from being stolen.
You are not going to get rid of guns, so educating more on the appropriate storage/usage and possible consequences for being irresponsible is imperative.   

Maybe we need some new laws??? 
Quite a departure from the classic "we just need to enforce the laws we have".

And who is going to make and how will they enforce these "new laws"?  What new laws would you create that would curb gun violence in cities like Chicago?

I wasn't commenting on gang violence in Chicago, I was commenting on the topic of secure and safe storage.
I think the Congressional houses should come together for some laws that would criminalize unsafe storage and set punishments for firearms finding their way into children's hands and firearms being stolen.

How could you possibly enforce something like that?

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

I agree it's totally stupid to say that guns bought for protection should be locked up. If they're locked up with the ammo kept separate then they aren't really for home defense anymore, so what's the point? Gun advocates know that. They just spew that shit as a defense mechanism.

I advocate locking the gun and ammo/magazine in a quick access biometric or coded pistol safe.  Those can be accessed in less than 5 seconds if needed.  
Most gun owners I know do this, if for nothing else, to keep them from being stolen.
You are not going to get rid of guns, so educating more on the appropriate storage/usage and possible consequences for being irresponsible is imperative.   

Maybe we need some new laws??? 
Quite a departure from the classic "we just need to enforce the laws we have".

And who is going to make and how will they enforce these "new laws"?  What new laws would you create that would curb gun violence in cities like Chicago?

I wasn't commenting on gang violence in Chicago, I was commenting on the topic of secure and safe storage.
I think the Congressional houses should come together for some laws that would criminalize unsafe storage and set punishments for firearms finding their way into children's hands and firearms being stolen.

How could you possibly enforce something like that?

The same way you enforce things like illicit drug use, just by catching those you can when you can.

I'm not suggesting that gun owners be raided for inspection, and I'm not suggesting that laws like that will magically stop kids from shooting themselves and their friends.

I'm just stating what's painfully obvious, unsafe use of firearms should be codified in law as illegal and punishment should be served when people are caught in misuse. 

As a society, we cant monitor every driver, and we cant expect traffic laws to magically stop dangerous driving practices, but that doesn't mean that traffic laws shouldn't exist.
Common sense.


Until the NRA gets involved and the "muh rights" crowd pipes up.

oftenreading said:

Yes, of course, to both rgambs and Halifaxxxx. We don't have direct enforcement of most of our laws; instead, we have an investigation when something goes wrong to see if a crime was committed.  We dont have police sitting in the passenger seat of every vehicle, but when there's a crash there's an investigation to see if the driver was speeding, or texting, or intoxicated, or anything else that might be against the law. Similarly, if there's an incident that suggests a gun wasn't safely stored (such as when a child shoots themself or someone else), then it's investigated and a charge may ensue. Not so difficult to conceptualize. 

oftenreading said:

Yes, of course, to both rgambs and Halifaxxxx. We don't have direct enforcement of most of our laws; instead, we have an investigation when something goes wrong to see if a crime was committed.  We dont have police sitting in the passenger seat of every vehicle, but when there's a crash there's an investigation to see if the driver was speeding, or texting, or intoxicated, or anything else that might be against the law. Similarly, if there's an incident that suggests a gun wasn't safely stored (such as when a child shoots themself or someone else), then it's investigated and a charge may ensue. Not so difficult to conceptualize. 

Go Beavers said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

oftenreading said:

Yes, of course, to both rgambs and Halifaxxxx. We don't have direct enforcement of most of our laws; instead, we have an investigation when something goes wrong to see if a crime was committed.  We dont have police sitting in the passenger seat of every vehicle, but when there's a crash there's an investigation to see if the driver was speeding, or texting, or intoxicated, or anything else that might be against the law. Similarly, if there's an incident that suggests a gun wasn't safely stored (such as when a child shoots themself or someone else), then it's investigated and a charge may ensue. Not so difficult to conceptualize. 

oftenreading said:

Yes, of course, to both rgambs and Halifaxxxx. We don't have direct enforcement of most of our laws; instead, we have an investigation when something goes wrong to see if a crime was committed.  We dont have police sitting in the passenger seat of every vehicle, but when there's a crash there's an investigation to see if the driver was speeding, or texting, or intoxicated, or anything else that might be against the law. Similarly, if there's an incident that suggests a gun wasn't safely stored (such as when a child shoots themself or someone else), then it's investigated and a charge may ensue. Not so difficult to conceptualize. 

Except rarely does the gun owner do time in the latter instance as its 'a tragedy' and they "suffered enough." Fuck that. Spend 5-10 in prison for your irresponsibility. Also, should be sued and their insurance company should pay out to the victims.

And rarely does a driver do time if they kill someone while doing something illegal. Only when it's a dui or clear proof of texting. Maybe drag racing. Otherwise they just need to say " I didn't see him" and they're clear.