America's Gun Violence #2

cblock4life · May 2022

Hobbes said:

show previous quotes

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

Here’s some semantics for you, are all guns capable of killing when the trigger is pulled? Yea, that’s what I thought.

No they can't and we went over this before...

No they can’t what? Are you telling me that you don’t believe all guns can kill someone or did you read my comment incorrectly? Serious question

Starter Pistol... Do we really want to do this?

No don’t do it because you’re making me sick. I thought people were about real change around here and your playing fucking word games. You’re all playing fucking word games while children are being shot to death. This is like being in the sandbox sticking your tongue out saying “I told you so!” except some of those ten year olds are dead now.

How about a portion of the NRA contributions to political campaigns gets redirected to making schools safe like Fort Knox? Not a pleasant thought but at least they won’t die. I haven’t seen too many suggestions that don’t talk about banning one weapon over another or stepping on peoples toes. Money talks…..I’m all in support of Ukraine so nobody go there….but how about we take loans out to build safer schools. If the tug of war known as gun control in America isn’t going change then we need new ideas as soon as possible

Because building safer schools to some means more armed guards, armed teachers, more guns, more guns, more guns. And it's not limited to just schools. We would need the same for places of worship, movie theaters, grocery stores, concerts, shopping malls, and on and on and on... We would be playing right into the hand of staunch 2A supporters and the NRA. I like that you are searching for solutions, but I don't see this one as effective.

I understand what you’re saying, and you’re right, but if they said “hey we can afford to protect our schools but nothing else” I’d take the deal.

tempo_n_groove · May 2022

tbergs said:

show previous quotes

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

if you want change, you have to know what change it is you want.

some of you keep hammering on the "semantics" issue. Sure, it's disingenuous from most on the gun toting side. I don't see it that way from mace. But I guess it's easier to pile on then to have an honest dialogue.

I see it this way, the extreme side of the anti-gun group want guns banned, the just past moderate side wants some guns/features banned or heavily restricted and the most approachable and reasonable group of that side are those who just want to implement tighter laws around the purchase and ownership of guns. This should be the group that gun advocates focus on and work with to reach an agreement to prevent some of these incidents from happening, but instead they want to focus on any conversation around guns that involves the word "ban" or deflect to any talk about gun laws as being political and not the right time.

Look, this isn't just me bloviating, listen to Abbot, watch the Ted Cruz interview. Cruz dropped the "psychopath" label almost immediately because it creates a separation between normal gun owners and what he wants to sell as the anomalies we can see coming. It's not that simple. But If that's the hill they want to die on, then people should be pissed off at law enforcement for not doing their job when all these red flags popped up, but instead Ted's out there backing the blue at a time when all they did was what they are hired and trained to do. Sure, the 18 year old can be described as a psychopath, but said psychopath was still able to purchase a gun so if you want to go down that road than be prepared for the follow-up of what the hell are you going to do about it? These "psychopaths" can purchase a gun with little to no effort besides a credit card and ID. Why not advocate for changes to the background process, longer wait times, age requirement changes or any other factors that increase the likelihood of preventing "psychopaths" from purchasing a firearm instead of avoiding discussing guns or deflecting that talk of gun law changes is political? Well, because these fucks are interested in self preservation of only one thing, their power and they know they will lose money and possibly votes if they even speak a word about doing anything gun related. And why is that? Because the people you want me to listen to and who are feigning honest dialogue are trying to inform people about the correct way to refer to certain types of firearms.

In what other profession, industry or field do we cater to this type of bullshit when it relates to preventing loss of life or severe injury? If my kid died in a car accident because the car seat I put them in was defective or made wrong, would the company tell me I wasn't describing the features of their car seat correctly when I said something needed to change or demanded higher standards for production? No, because they would know that the consumers of their product would no longer support them and they would go bankrupt or be held liable in court. Yes, I get it, guns are doing what they were made to do, kill, so in theory we should be applauding the manufacturers for creating these flawless tools of carnage. We should all be proud that 18 year old boys lacking a fully developed frontal lobe have the legal right to purchase as many AR-15's as they want, but yet we don't want them drinking alcohol legally and in most states they can't even smoke marijuana because drugs and alcohol bad, guns good.

I can't have this conversation with a gun advocate if they want to try and make it all about terminology. It doesn't have to be that way. Why aren't they super pissed? Why don't they reach out to their local elected official and demand change? Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way. Be the change you want to see in the world. I grew up around guns and my family owned about 100 various firearms. I shot some sort of gun almost every day from the time I was 7 until I was 18. I carried a gun for my profession for 4 years. I was proficient and understand the differences in the types of firearms being mentioned, but I also know some people aren't, but that's not a sticking point when it comes to talking about ways to improve gun safety and the culture of guns in this country. I abhor guns besides those used to hunt with. We have been programmed to fear being attacked, fear being taken advantage of and fear the "other", but what are we really trying to protect with a gun in most cases? Property. A phone, a car, cash. Things that are replaceable. Our right to bear arms does not need to be so complicated. There can be compromises to what we as a country believe should be available to the citizenry without banning guns completely. We have restrictions and laws in place around every other aspect of what is acceptable to be a human being, and yes, there will always be people who break those laws and find ways around these systems, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something because it won't be 100% effective.

Anyway, I just want change. I want the GOP to come forward and recognize this is a bigger problem than just mental illness and that guns are a part of the problem and decide to do something about it.

Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way.

And then this is what the abortion debate becomes... Just change Firearm to abortion and there you have it.

Funny, all of that and that's your take away? I am not even advocating for an all out gun ban. We're way past that. You are the one who has mentioned being fearful of guns being taken away. Well, that's not gonna happen any time soon, at least definitely not in your lifetime. Have you seen the SCOTUS? However, abortion is about to be banned, so I guess all these conservatives who want abortion banned and guns freely allowed probably are fearful it could happen to them and knew they were lying the last several years when they said Roe v. Wade will never be overturned.

I can't comment on every sentence...

It is interesting to me, that one line.

States Rights are becoming a big deal now. If you can have abortion taken away as a state right you damn well sure can take a gun away. I would see California doing that for sure with NY following.

Gern Blansten · May 2022

Yeah I'd take anything at this point

cp3iverson · May 2022

Nightmare. Peace to all of those families directly affected by this.

tempo_n_groove · May 2022

cblock4life said:

show previous quotes

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

Here’s some semantics for you, are all guns capable of killing when the trigger is pulled? Yea, that’s what I thought.

No they can't and we went over this before...

No they can’t what? Are you telling me that you don’t believe all guns can kill someone or did you read my comment incorrectly? Serious question

Starter Pistol... Do we really want to do this?

No don’t do it because you’re making me sick. I thought people were about real change around here and your playing fucking word games. You’re all playing fucking word games while children are being shot to death. This is like being in the sandbox sticking your tongue out saying “I told you so!” except some of those ten year olds are dead now.

How about a portion of the NRA contributions to political campaigns gets redirected to making schools safe like Fort Knox? Not a pleasant thought but at least they won’t die. I haven’t seen too many suggestions that don’t talk about banning one weapon over another or stepping on peoples toes. Money talks…..I’m all in support of Ukraine so nobody go there….but how about we take loans out to build safer schools. If the tug of war known as gun control in America isn’t going change then we need new ideas as soon as possible

I have said multiple times that I don't mind making it a little more difficult to acquire a gun as long as I can still own it.

I know that and I’m sorry that I’m throwing all this emotion at you, truly I am. You didn’t pull the trigger, you don’t make the laws, I guess I should just log out so I don’t say something I really don’t mean or get banned for life. It’s not you….it’s everything, literally all aspects of this country are just on the wrong path.

We are here to talk about this stuff because at the end of the day I'm tired of hearing about these things too. We chip away at stuff hoping to get the common ground and a common sense gun law package. It'll happen.

bootlegger10 · May 2022

“What you thought was freedom was just greed”.

A bunch of people in this country who only care about themselves.

tempo_n_groove · May 2022

brianlux said:

And on and on it goes. Stay tuned for the next massacre. Thanks for nothing, GOP scum.

https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-school-shooting-senate-republicans-938382083f82e187531d604db3edf211
Senate GOP blocks domestic terrorism bill, gun policy debate

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats’ first attempt at responding to the back-to-back mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, failed in the Senate Thursday as Republicans blocked a domestic terrorism bill that would have opened debate on difficult questions surrounding hate crimes and gun safety.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. tried to nudge Republicans into taking up a domestic terrorism bill that had cleared the House quickly last week after mass shootings at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, and a church in Southern California targeting people of color. He said it could become the basis for negotiation.
But the vote failed nearly along party lines, raising fresh doubts about the possibility of robust debate, let alone eventual compromise, on gun safety measures. The final vote was 47-47, short of the 60 needed to take up the bill, with Sen. Susan Collins of Maine the only Republican to vote in favor.

more at link.

We knew this wouldn't pass. I said so after reading the bill. It adds more government to our already clogged system so the GOP wouldn't do that. It's also a type of Patriot act where they can spy on our own. We ended up hating the Patriot act for that so this I would guess would be the same?

If they put Antifa rhetoric I bet that thing gets passed.

Halifax2TheMax · May 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

show previous quotes

tbergs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

if you want change, you have to know what change it is you want.

some of you keep hammering on the "semantics" issue. Sure, it's disingenuous from most on the gun toting side. I don't see it that way from mace. But I guess it's easier to pile on then to have an honest dialogue.

I see it this way, the extreme side of the anti-gun group want guns banned, the just past moderate side wants some guns/features banned or heavily restricted and the most approachable and reasonable group of that side are those who just want to implement tighter laws around the purchase and ownership of guns. This should be the group that gun advocates focus on and work with to reach an agreement to prevent some of these incidents from happening, but instead they want to focus on any conversation around guns that involves the word "ban" or deflect to any talk about gun laws as being political and not the right time.

Look, this isn't just me bloviating, listen to Abbot, watch the Ted Cruz interview. Cruz dropped the "psychopath" label almost immediately because it creates a separation between normal gun owners and what he wants to sell as the anomalies we can see coming. It's not that simple. But If that's the hill they want to die on, then people should be pissed off at law enforcement for not doing their job when all these red flags popped up, but instead Ted's out there backing the blue at a time when all they did was what they are hired and trained to do. Sure, the 18 year old can be described as a psychopath, but said psychopath was still able to purchase a gun so if you want to go down that road than be prepared for the follow-up of what the hell are you going to do about it? These "psychopaths" can purchase a gun with little to no effort besides a credit card and ID. Why not advocate for changes to the background process, longer wait times, age requirement changes or any other factors that increase the likelihood of preventing "psychopaths" from purchasing a firearm instead of avoiding discussing guns or deflecting that talk of gun law changes is political? Well, because these fucks are interested in self preservation of only one thing, their power and they know they will lose money and possibly votes if they even speak a word about doing anything gun related. And why is that? Because the people you want me to listen to and who are feigning honest dialogue are trying to inform people about the correct way to refer to certain types of firearms.

In what other profession, industry or field do we cater to this type of bullshit when it relates to preventing loss of life or severe injury? If my kid died in a car accident because the car seat I put them in was defective or made wrong, would the company tell me I wasn't describing the features of their car seat correctly when I said something needed to change or demanded higher standards for production? No, because they would know that the consumers of their product would no longer support them and they would go bankrupt or be held liable in court. Yes, I get it, guns are doing what they were made to do, kill, so in theory we should be applauding the manufacturers for creating these flawless tools of carnage. We should all be proud that 18 year old boys lacking a fully developed frontal lobe have the legal right to purchase as many AR-15's as they want, but yet we don't want them drinking alcohol legally and in most states they can't even smoke marijuana because drugs and alcohol bad, guns good.

I can't have this conversation with a gun advocate if they want to try and make it all about terminology. It doesn't have to be that way. Why aren't they super pissed? Why don't they reach out to their local elected official and demand change? Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way. Be the change you want to see in the world. I grew up around guns and my family owned about 100 various firearms. I shot some sort of gun almost every day from the time I was 7 until I was 18. I carried a gun for my profession for 4 years. I was proficient and understand the differences in the types of firearms being mentioned, but I also know some people aren't, but that's not a sticking point when it comes to talking about ways to improve gun safety and the culture of guns in this country. I abhor guns besides those used to hunt with. We have been programmed to fear being attacked, fear being taken advantage of and fear the "other", but what are we really trying to protect with a gun in most cases? Property. A phone, a car, cash. Things that are replaceable. Our right to bear arms does not need to be so complicated. There can be compromises to what we as a country believe should be available to the citizenry without banning guns completely. We have restrictions and laws in place around every other aspect of what is acceptable to be a human being, and yes, there will always be people who break those laws and find ways around these systems, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something because it won't be 100% effective.

Anyway, I just want change. I want the GOP to come forward and recognize this is a bigger problem than just mental illness and that guns are a part of the problem and decide to do something about it.

Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way.

And then this is what the abortion debate becomes... Just change Firearm to abortion and there you have it.

Funny, all of that and that's your take away? I am not even advocating for an all out gun ban. We're way past that. You are the one who has mentioned being fearful of guns being taken away. Well, that's not gonna happen any time soon, at least definitely not in your lifetime. Have you seen the SCOTUS? However, abortion is about to be banned, so I guess all these conservatives who want abortion banned and guns freely allowed probably are fearful it could happen to them and knew they were lying the last several years when they said Roe v. Wade will never be overturned.

I can't comment on every sentence...

It is interesting to me, that one line.

States Rights are becoming a big deal now. If you can have abortion taken away as a state right you damn well sure can take a gun away. I would see California doing that for sure with NY following.

Please stop. No state is going to ban firearms or come get your guns. They may restrict ownership. They may ban further sales of certain types but they're not going to confiscate or "take guns away." Waaaaaaaaaay too late for that.

Mace, I think it was Mace, said there was a large percentage of people who wanted to "ban firearms." I can't find any polling on what that percentage is. I'd appreciate a link to a known polling source and not some pro-NRA or gun rights advocacy group on what the actual percentage of Americans want to "ban firearms."

cblock4life · May 2022

My grandchildren attend a fairly new daycare/pre-school that requires your hand print scanned to enter. One way in, one way out (with the exception of emergency exits). I’d rather not find out if it works but I’m thinking it’s a start.

Cropduster-80 · May 2022

When you are advertising the number of guns you have in terms of acreage, it’s probably a sign you’ve gone too far

Poncier · May 2022

bootlegger10 said:

“What you thought was freedom was just greed”.

We're "already gone, felt that way all along".

Merkin Baller · May 2022

Ted Cruz spoke pretty passionately about unlocked back doors in the wake of this shooting.

Good stuff.

tempo_n_groove · May 2022

Halifax2TheMax said:

show previous quotes

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

if you want change, you have to know what change it is you want.

some of you keep hammering on the "semantics" issue. Sure, it's disingenuous from most on the gun toting side. I don't see it that way from mace. But I guess it's easier to pile on then to have an honest dialogue.

I see it this way, the extreme side of the anti-gun group want guns banned, the just past moderate side wants some guns/features banned or heavily restricted and the most approachable and reasonable group of that side are those who just want to implement tighter laws around the purchase and ownership of guns. This should be the group that gun advocates focus on and work with to reach an agreement to prevent some of these incidents from happening, but instead they want to focus on any conversation around guns that involves the word "ban" or deflect to any talk about gun laws as being political and not the right time.

Look, this isn't just me bloviating, listen to Abbot, watch the Ted Cruz interview. Cruz dropped the "psychopath" label almost immediately because it creates a separation between normal gun owners and what he wants to sell as the anomalies we can see coming. It's not that simple. But If that's the hill they want to die on, then people should be pissed off at law enforcement for not doing their job when all these red flags popped up, but instead Ted's out there backing the blue at a time when all they did was what they are hired and trained to do. Sure, the 18 year old can be described as a psychopath, but said psychopath was still able to purchase a gun so if you want to go down that road than be prepared for the follow-up of what the hell are you going to do about it? These "psychopaths" can purchase a gun with little to no effort besides a credit card and ID. Why not advocate for changes to the background process, longer wait times, age requirement changes or any other factors that increase the likelihood of preventing "psychopaths" from purchasing a firearm instead of avoiding discussing guns or deflecting that talk of gun law changes is political? Well, because these fucks are interested in self preservation of only one thing, their power and they know they will lose money and possibly votes if they even speak a word about doing anything gun related. And why is that? Because the people you want me to listen to and who are feigning honest dialogue are trying to inform people about the correct way to refer to certain types of firearms.

In what other profession, industry or field do we cater to this type of bullshit when it relates to preventing loss of life or severe injury? If my kid died in a car accident because the car seat I put them in was defective or made wrong, would the company tell me I wasn't describing the features of their car seat correctly when I said something needed to change or demanded higher standards for production? No, because they would know that the consumers of their product would no longer support them and they would go bankrupt or be held liable in court. Yes, I get it, guns are doing what they were made to do, kill, so in theory we should be applauding the manufacturers for creating these flawless tools of carnage. We should all be proud that 18 year old boys lacking a fully developed frontal lobe have the legal right to purchase as many AR-15's as they want, but yet we don't want them drinking alcohol legally and in most states they can't even smoke marijuana because drugs and alcohol bad, guns good.

I can't have this conversation with a gun advocate if they want to try and make it all about terminology. It doesn't have to be that way. Why aren't they super pissed? Why don't they reach out to their local elected official and demand change? Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way. Be the change you want to see in the world. I grew up around guns and my family owned about 100 various firearms. I shot some sort of gun almost every day from the time I was 7 until I was 18. I carried a gun for my profession for 4 years. I was proficient and understand the differences in the types of firearms being mentioned, but I also know some people aren't, but that's not a sticking point when it comes to talking about ways to improve gun safety and the culture of guns in this country. I abhor guns besides those used to hunt with. We have been programmed to fear being attacked, fear being taken advantage of and fear the "other", but what are we really trying to protect with a gun in most cases? Property. A phone, a car, cash. Things that are replaceable. Our right to bear arms does not need to be so complicated. There can be compromises to what we as a country believe should be available to the citizenry without banning guns completely. We have restrictions and laws in place around every other aspect of what is acceptable to be a human being, and yes, there will always be people who break those laws and find ways around these systems, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something because it won't be 100% effective.

Anyway, I just want change. I want the GOP to come forward and recognize this is a bigger problem than just mental illness and that guns are a part of the problem and decide to do something about it.

Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way.

And then this is what the abortion debate becomes... Just change Firearm to abortion and there you have it.

Funny, all of that and that's your take away? I am not even advocating for an all out gun ban. We're way past that. You are the one who has mentioned being fearful of guns being taken away. Well, that's not gonna happen any time soon, at least definitely not in your lifetime. Have you seen the SCOTUS? However, abortion is about to be banned, so I guess all these conservatives who want abortion banned and guns freely allowed probably are fearful it could happen to them and knew they were lying the last several years when they said Roe v. Wade will never be overturned.

I can't comment on every sentence...

It is interesting to me, that one line.

States Rights are becoming a big deal now. If you can have abortion taken away as a state right you damn well sure can take a gun away. I would see California doing that for sure with NY following.

Please stop. No state is going to ban firearms or come get your guns. They may restrict ownership. They may ban further sales of certain types but they're not going to confiscate or "take guns away." Waaaaaaaaaay too late for that.

Mace, I think it was Mace, said there was a large percentage of people who wanted to "ban firearms." I can't find any polling on what that percentage is. I'd appreciate a link to a known polling source and not some pro-NRA or gun rights advocacy group on what the actual percentage of Americans want to "ban firearms."

I thought the same about abortion...

josevolution · May 2022

pjhawks said:

show previous quotes

The Juggler said:

Ban assault rifles. Fuck the semantics. Jesus christ.

Yup. And stop voting republicans. It will never happen as long as republicans are in power

This I’m done debating with gun or 2A die hards! Fuck e’m

Halifax2TheMax · May 2022

Nothing can be done. Thoughts and prayers.

A school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, involving young children has reignited the national US debate about access to firearms. What does the data tell us about gun culture and its impact?

Firearms deaths are a fixture in American life.

There were 1.5 million of them between 1968 and 2017 - that's higher than the number of soldiers killed in every US conflict since the American War for Independence in 1775.

In 2020 alone, more than 45,000 Americans died at the end of a barrel of a gun, whether by homicide or suicide, more than any other year on record. The figure represents a 25% increase from five years prior, and a 43% increase from 2010.

But the issue is a highly political one, pitting gun control advocates against sectors of the population fiercely protective of their constitutionally-enshrined right to bear arms.

How many guns are there in the US?

While calculating the number of guns in private hands around the world is difficult, figures from the Small Arms Survey - a Swiss-based leading research project - estimate that there were 390 million guns in circulation in 2018.

The US ratio of 120.5 firearms per 100 residents, up from 88 per 100 in 2011, far surpasses that of other countries around the world.

More recent data also suggests that gun ownership grew significantly over the last several years. One study, published by the Annals of Internal Medicine in February, found that 7.5 million US adults - just under 3% of the population - became first new gun owners between January 2019 and April 2021.

This, in turn, exposed 11 million people to firearms in their homes, including 5 million children. About half of new gun owners in that time period were women, while 40% were either black or Hispanic.

A separate study, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2021, linked a rise in gun ownership during the pandemic to higher rates of gun injuries among - and inflicted by - children.

How do US gun deaths break down?

According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a total of 45,222 people died from gun-related injuries of all causes during 2020, the last year for which complete data is available.

And while mass shooting and gun murders generally garner more media attention, of the total, 54% - about 24,300 deaths - were suicides.

A 2016 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found there was a strong relationship between higher levels of gun ownership in a state and higher firearm suicide rates for both men and women.

Advocates for stricter gun laws in the United States often cite this statistic when pushing lawmakers to devote more resources to mental health and fewer to easing gun restrictions.

How do US gun killings compare with other countries?

In 2020, 43% of the deaths - amounting to 19,384 people - were homicides, according to data from the CDC. The figure represents a 34% increase from 2019, and a 75% increase over the course of the previous decade.

Nearly 53 people are killed each day by a firearm in the US, according to the data.

The data also shows that the vast majority of murders, 79%, were carried out with guns.

That's a significantly larger proportion of homicides than is the case in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, and many other countries.

Are mass shootings becoming deadlier?

Deaths from the "mass shootings" that attract international attention, however, are harder to track.

While the country does not have a single definition for "mass shootings", the FBI has for over a decade tracked "active shooter incidents" in which "an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area".

According to the FBI, there were 345 "active shooter incidents" in the United States between 2000-2020, resulting in more than 1,024 deaths and 1,828 injuries.

The deadliest such attack, in Las Vegas in 2017, killed more than 50 people and left 500 wounded. The vast majority of mass shootings, however, leave fewer than 30 people dead.

Who supports gun control?

Despite widespread and vocal public outrage - often in the wake of gun violence - American support for stricter gun laws in 2020 fell to the lowest level since 2014, according to polling by Gallup.

Only 52% of Americans surveyed said they wanted stricter gun laws, while 35% said they should remain the same.

Eleven percent surveyed said laws should be "made less strict".

The issue is also one that is hyper-partisan and extremely divisive, falling largely along party lines.

"Democrats are nearly unanimous in their support for stricture gun laws," the same Gallup study noted, with nearly 91% in favour of stricter gun laws.

Only 24% Republicans, on the other hand, agreed with the same statement, along with 45% of Independent voters.

Some states have taken steps to ban or strictly regulate ownership of assault weapons. Laws vary by state but California, for example, has banned ownership of assault weapons with limited exceptions.

Some controls are widely supported by people across the political divide - such as restrictions governing the sale of guns to people who are mentally ill or on "watch" lists.

Who opposes gun control?

Despite years of financial woes and internal strife, the National Rifle Association (NRA) remains the most powerful gun lobby in the United States, with a substantial budget to influence members of Congress on gun policy.

In January, the NRA filed for bankruptcy as part of a fraud case against some of its own senior staff. Even after the move, it vowed to continue "confronting anti-Second Amendment activities, promoting firearm safety and training, and advancing public programs across the United States".

Over the last several election cycles, it, and other organisations, have consistently spent more on pro-gun rights messaging than their rivals in the gun control lobby.

A number of states have also gone as far as to largely eliminate restrictions on who can carry a gun. In June 2021, for example, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed into law a "permitless carry bill" that allows the state's residents to carry handguns without a license or training.

Similarly, on 12 April Georgia became the 25th in the nation to eliminate the need for a permit to conceal or openly carry a firearm. The law means any citizen of that state has the right to carry a firearm without a licence or a permit.

The law was backed by the NRA, and leaders within the organisation called the move "a monumental moment for the Second Amendment".

America's gun culture - in seven charts - BBC News

Halifax2TheMax · May 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

show previous quotes

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

if you want change, you have to know what change it is you want.

some of you keep hammering on the "semantics" issue. Sure, it's disingenuous from most on the gun toting side. I don't see it that way from mace. But I guess it's easier to pile on then to have an honest dialogue.

I see it this way, the extreme side of the anti-gun group want guns banned, the just past moderate side wants some guns/features banned or heavily restricted and the most approachable and reasonable group of that side are those who just want to implement tighter laws around the purchase and ownership of guns. This should be the group that gun advocates focus on and work with to reach an agreement to prevent some of these incidents from happening, but instead they want to focus on any conversation around guns that involves the word "ban" or deflect to any talk about gun laws as being political and not the right time.

Look, this isn't just me bloviating, listen to Abbot, watch the Ted Cruz interview. Cruz dropped the "psychopath" label almost immediately because it creates a separation between normal gun owners and what he wants to sell as the anomalies we can see coming. It's not that simple. But If that's the hill they want to die on, then people should be pissed off at law enforcement for not doing their job when all these red flags popped up, but instead Ted's out there backing the blue at a time when all they did was what they are hired and trained to do. Sure, the 18 year old can be described as a psychopath, but said psychopath was still able to purchase a gun so if you want to go down that road than be prepared for the follow-up of what the hell are you going to do about it? These "psychopaths" can purchase a gun with little to no effort besides a credit card and ID. Why not advocate for changes to the background process, longer wait times, age requirement changes or any other factors that increase the likelihood of preventing "psychopaths" from purchasing a firearm instead of avoiding discussing guns or deflecting that talk of gun law changes is political? Well, because these fucks are interested in self preservation of only one thing, their power and they know they will lose money and possibly votes if they even speak a word about doing anything gun related. And why is that? Because the people you want me to listen to and who are feigning honest dialogue are trying to inform people about the correct way to refer to certain types of firearms.

In what other profession, industry or field do we cater to this type of bullshit when it relates to preventing loss of life or severe injury? If my kid died in a car accident because the car seat I put them in was defective or made wrong, would the company tell me I wasn't describing the features of their car seat correctly when I said something needed to change or demanded higher standards for production? No, because they would know that the consumers of their product would no longer support them and they would go bankrupt or be held liable in court. Yes, I get it, guns are doing what they were made to do, kill, so in theory we should be applauding the manufacturers for creating these flawless tools of carnage. We should all be proud that 18 year old boys lacking a fully developed frontal lobe have the legal right to purchase as many AR-15's as they want, but yet we don't want them drinking alcohol legally and in most states they can't even smoke marijuana because drugs and alcohol bad, guns good.

I can't have this conversation with a gun advocate if they want to try and make it all about terminology. It doesn't have to be that way. Why aren't they super pissed? Why don't they reach out to their local elected official and demand change? Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way. Be the change you want to see in the world. I grew up around guns and my family owned about 100 various firearms. I shot some sort of gun almost every day from the time I was 7 until I was 18. I carried a gun for my profession for 4 years. I was proficient and understand the differences in the types of firearms being mentioned, but I also know some people aren't, but that's not a sticking point when it comes to talking about ways to improve gun safety and the culture of guns in this country. I abhor guns besides those used to hunt with. We have been programmed to fear being attacked, fear being taken advantage of and fear the "other", but what are we really trying to protect with a gun in most cases? Property. A phone, a car, cash. Things that are replaceable. Our right to bear arms does not need to be so complicated. There can be compromises to what we as a country believe should be available to the citizenry without banning guns completely. We have restrictions and laws in place around every other aspect of what is acceptable to be a human being, and yes, there will always be people who break those laws and find ways around these systems, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something because it won't be 100% effective.

Anyway, I just want change. I want the GOP to come forward and recognize this is a bigger problem than just mental illness and that guns are a part of the problem and decide to do something about it.

Is it because they value owning a firearm over saving a life? It sure comes across that way.

And then this is what the abortion debate becomes... Just change Firearm to abortion and there you have it.

Funny, all of that and that's your take away? I am not even advocating for an all out gun ban. We're way past that. You are the one who has mentioned being fearful of guns being taken away. Well, that's not gonna happen any time soon, at least definitely not in your lifetime. Have you seen the SCOTUS? However, abortion is about to be banned, so I guess all these conservatives who want abortion banned and guns freely allowed probably are fearful it could happen to them and knew they were lying the last several years when they said Roe v. Wade will never be overturned.

I can't comment on every sentence...

It is interesting to me, that one line.

States Rights are becoming a big deal now. If you can have abortion taken away as a state right you damn well sure can take a gun away. I would see California doing that for sure with NY following.

Please stop. No state is going to ban firearms or come get your guns. They may restrict ownership. They may ban further sales of certain types but they're not going to confiscate or "take guns away." Waaaaaaaaaay too late for that.

Mace, I think it was Mace, said there was a large percentage of people who wanted to "ban firearms." I can't find any polling on what that percentage is. I'd appreciate a link to a known polling source and not some pro-NRA or gun rights advocacy group on what the actual percentage of Americans want to "ban firearms."

I thought the same about abortion...

Do you really believe that abortion is going to stop or women won't get abortions because of what laws OK, FL and Tejas (and other red states will pass) have passed? Conversely, do you really believe the gubmint is going to confiscate 400 million firearms in this country? Do you really believe that?

Can you live without the right to own an assault rifle but all other manner of firearms or would you consider yourself unable to defend yourself and your right to bear arms infringed?

Bentleyspop · May 2022

Sad...

https://twitter.com/Ernie_Zuniga/status/1529872688939995136?t=S7zktTPD3xp2_1W_qPwnEQ&s=19

Poncier · May 2022

Bentleyspop said:

Sad...

https://twitter.com/Ernie_Zuniga/status/1529872688939995136?t=S7zktTPD3xp2_1W_qPwnEQ&s=19

Jeez. More collateral damage to this nightmare. How awful.

tbergs · May 2022

Poncier said:

show previous quotes

Bentleyspop said:

Sad...

https://twitter.com/Ernie_Zuniga/status/1529872688939995136?t=S7zktTPD3xp2_1W_qPwnEQ&s=19

Jeez. More collateral damage to this nightmare. How awful.

Oof. What a travesty. We have parents without children who were murdered at school and now 4 children without parents, one who was murdered and the other who died due to the extreme trauma he experienced in the last 48 hours. If only there had been a man trap, trip wire, armed teachers or retired military/police at that school....

bootlegger10 · May 2022

The Republicans will cling close to their guns on nights like these. Despicable. I understand not banning guns, but their immediate reaction of you'll have to take the guns from my cold dead hands versus sympathy or any positive action steps is terrible.

America's Gun Violence #2

Comments

Senate GOP blocks domestic terrorism bill, gun policy debate