Gun Advocates, What Say You?? (Page 8)

Shame indeed. I'm not trying to make this a left or right thing, or anything of the like. What I am trying to do is give context.... there are political issues in this country. This is one of them. In some circumstances some people won't stand for it... in others they don't see they are doing the same thing. It does not matter what my opinion on the subject is... but some context is helpful... voter ID. It's a divisive issue. Yet the exact same things are at play in this issue. Some people think others should do something, others disagree. That's all. But where rights are involved... it's not that easy. There are a couple such issues like that, this is another.

The whole problem with your "wants" is... it's not really up for debate. Rights mean something. Inalienable has a definition. In many other instances, people will defend rights vehemently, because it is important to them... but stuff they don't care about... ehhh... you can do away with that. But for some reason... the 2A is the only one where some feel that heavy regulation of a right is OK. There might be legal standing for that... "IF" you can show there is a legitimate need. However.... other than wanting more regulation, you have yet to give me one single law that addresses the actual problem... gun violence/crime/mass murder. Give me one single regulation that will have a defined and definite impact on that, and I will listen. So far, you have proposed more of the same, and ideas on how to regulate irresponsibility. And the whole time... all your proposals would be fine... if bearing arms was actually a privilege. But it isn't. It's a right. An inalienable one.

And regulation I do agree with... back ground checks. Even for private sales. Full auto weapons being heavily regulated... even though I can own them. I have no reason to. But all I have to do is pay the tax, and fill out the form, and pay through the nose for a full auto M16. Prohibited person... as deemed through due process.. Minors can't buy pistols. Adjudicated (due process) mentally defective, or an alcoholic/addict. Domestic violence convictions... all the stuff on the background check... I agree with. Training for permits, I agree.

So, propose something that actually addresses gun violence... the willful act of harming another... and mass shootings.... or repeal the 2A. Because when you repeal the 2A, you can do all those things you want. You can ALLOW responsible people to own guns, and you can prohibit others you deem unworthy.... before they actually have committed a crime. Because you do not need due process to prohibit certain privileges for certain people. And then we can have all the regulation you want.

Here is an example of the ridiculousness of gun control... NY passed the law... no more than 5 rounds... they amended it to 7. You can legally own higher capacity magazines, but you can't load more than 7. Let that sink in for a moment. Let it marinate.... I can own all the 15 round magazines I want... but it is a crime to load more than 7 in it. Absolute idiocy... that does nothing to address the problem. Do you think Lanza or Homes would have only loaded 7 if they lived in NY???

I always make fun of the gated communities around here because I've yet to see one that the gate isn't broken and open all day/night.  lol

OK...  I heard you. I understand your point now. Make acquisition difficult to discourage ownership. That's just a paraphrase, not a snarky comment or trying to put words in your mouth. The goal being that the "wrong" people are discouraged, and the "right" people can still do what they want. 

So we can do that. It doesn't bar ownership, but it doesn't stop determined people. Determined legal people that might wind up doing something illegal. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter to me. It isn't going to change my life. Cool, I still get all the guns I want.

However, I don't think you are getting my point. We can both agree. We can both feel good about it. I can now claim I have common sense because I agreed to common sense gun control. (that is snarky ) but it is still a hope and a prayer and nothing meaningful is actually happening. And 20 years from now, when we are both old and crotchety, we will be in the same boat saying the same thing that "more needs to be done". 

And at it's core... it is still an end around a right. Your goal is to limit ownership. A noble goal to be sure. Because you and I both don't want crazy irresponsible potential criminals to have guns. But the goal itself is flawed. SCOTUS has ruled is similar cases that if your goal is to limit rights in general, it's a no go. So all I'm trying to say is, if you want to address certain problems, then that might be reasonable. But if too many people have guns, and you want fewer people to have guns.... no matter how you dress that up and spin it, you are still trying to restrict rights. That's not how this works. 

SCOTUS has also ruled that the 2A can most certainly be regulated. It isn't an open ended no rules right. That is why we have the gun control we do have. We might be able to make it better, but gun control in general is limited in it's ability to keep bad things from happening. There might indeed be licensing in the future. Heller stated the decision did not rule out licenses. But it would have to be "shall issue", not "may issue" unless there was a specific reason. And their specific reason is due process... felon, mentally defective, drunk.... So no matter how big of a jerk idiot you are... if your record is clean... you get a gun. I'm not sure what other types of people we could preclude... violent misdemeanors. DUI? A history of drug abuse... a drug charge? Perhaps. 

It's not that I do not think something should be done... I simply think other more effective things could be done as has already been mentioned. Lock up violent offenders for good. Make room by not imprisoning non-violent offenders. Put an end to the drug war. Stop prosecution, lessen penalties, or flat out make them legal. But the drug war fuels the vast majority of gun violence. Begin paying for State mental hospitals again. Put money into mental health. Put money into drug addiction services. I simply feel that that will have a much bigger impact and help more of society in a variety of ways than simply putting more bandaids on with ineffective gun controls. 

I think 2A is fundamentally flawed thinking; but the SCOTUS does not-so that's that.

Mental Health professionals should be able, with the touch of a button, to 'deny' someone the ability to buy and/or posses a firearm if they feel that person is a risk; but HIPPA and patient privacy prevents that from happening, as well.

Gun Ownership 'should' require more extensive Education and Training.  At least similar to Driver's Ed.  And it should be reoccurring.  Will it prevent mass shootings?  NO, but it 'may' prevent some accidental deaths.  And if it saves even ONE child....if that's YOUR child, then one is enough.

However....

When this thread started I had a very clear idea of what my OWN opinions were regarding Gun Violence and Gun Ownership. 

Now, after reading all of your posts, I'm not so sure  what the way forward is. 

Someone said it earlier  sic. "We keep trying to solve problems from the middle-not from the beginning".  (apologies for paraphrasing)

Oh no......you did NOT just invoke the "for the children" clause.

Yes.  Yes I did.  

As a country we spend billions of dollars teaching parents to use car seats correctly.  Hows about we teach gun owners to be more responsible around children.   Because a lot of them, obviously, didn't get the memo. 

Sounds good.  But my Right Wing friends will demand to know who's gonna pay for it. 

What would be the incentive to take this type of course? 

I was taught to handle a firearm safely by my Grandpa and my dad.  My son and daughters were taught by their Grandpa and me.  I suspect I will teach my Grandchildren along with their father.  No classes needed.....no cost to the taxpayer. 

I get the idea of safety classes....as long as everyone understands that there will still be accidental shootings and don't freak every time one happens.

There are few phrases in the english language that strike as much concern as "if it can safe just one life, isn't it worth it".  You can justify pretty much anything with such a phrase.  Seriously government control of every aspect of your life, your job, your hobbies, and most especially the ability to own firearms can be justified.

As an example, we should have mandatory counseling and ultrasounds for anyone considering an abortion because it could save just one life.  We should make it mandatory for all people to be in their homes by 10:00 every night because it could save just one life.  We should ban cars and make everyone ride bikes, i mean if it saves just one life.  We should make everyone go to church to learn about morality from the Bible because it could save one life you know.

I'm not advocating any of these things of course, but the "if it saves one life" is simply an absurd emotional argument no matter what the topic is.

In the end......no lives will be saved.....it's a certainty.  

And here's where YOUR argument falls apart.....

Give me a number?  HOW MANY LIVES do we have to save before anything is 'worth it'.  

5?   10?    100?    1000?   You all put your heads together and come up with a number that the rest of us can use as a goalpost.  Say, it's a 1000; and it can be determined  that  "xxx" method will potentially save a 1000-THEN do we get some meaningful reform?   Of course we won't-the goals will move again. It'll be another 'unwinnable' argument.  THIS is why the NRA is so hell bent on NEVER allowing the Govt. to collect any kind of meaningful data regarding gun violence.  Because if we have tangible facts, then it goes without saying that we could incorporate 'meaningful' changes to existing laws.   And rabid pro-2A folks simply won't allow that.  Not for 1 life-not for a 1000.   IMO

LB, We are in almost 100% agreement on cause/effect of gun crime/violence and the criminal justice system. Tough road to hoe, there.

But A 15 yr old kid got shot in the face out here today by a friend who thought the gun was unloaded.   One of but dozens of horrible, preventable, accidental gun deaths that occurred today.  You don't think anything can be done about THAT-that's fine.  However, I'm not so content with the 'status quo'.  My biggest gripe is the scores of people who choose to do nothing (but wrap themselves up in the portions of the constitution that they AGREE with) will impede the work of those who aren't ready to simply give up. 

It's Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.  Life > Liberty

Yeah, I read that on a bumper sticker somewhere. 

I think the phrase life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness implies that all three of these things only exist without the other two.