RANT: i am obese and on a phone

[Final_Rep]

The problem with discussing "gun control", at this point, is that the nation is already armed. There are hundreds of millions of guns already out there. We are an armed nation, and have been for over 200 years. There is no practical way to suddenly make them all disappear, even if you wanted to. So what's next? Ban the sale of new guns? That may have an effect...about 100 years from now. Until then, anyone who wants a gun will be able to get one, in much the same way they can still get marijuana, *******, etc.

I understand why politicians say to change gun laws. It gives the illusion that they are solving these sorts of high profile crimes. After a tragedy, people want those in charge to ensure them that such things won't happen again. But politicians can't do that. IMO, believing otherwise is being unrealistic and not bothering to look at facts. You can't legislate away crime.

But if you're going to suggest that something be done, what, exactly, do you propose be done...in specific, realistic, measurable terms? Personally, most of what I hear is simply emotion and rhetoric, and very little of something concrete that would actually work.

I won't pretend to know the answer to this post. You've hit the nail on the head I think.

But two things come to mind, just general thoughts:
Just because something takes a long time (like 100 years to have a gun law take effect) doesn't always mean it's not worth doing.
Legislation that improves the quality of living in this country in effect legislates away crime if it prevents people from feeling the need to take these kinds of actions.

[Farley1324]

No.

Frankly I don't understand what Beslan has to do with this discussion.

I just wanted you to know portraying that as a viable source of information only puts you further into CT/paranoiac territory.

https://www.google.com/search?q=John+Giduck

It is a school that was violently attacked, and many students + faculty/staff were killed. Further, the book discusses what might be able to effectively prevent/mitigate this kind of thing from happening.

I don't see how it doesn't relate to this discussion.

I never had a reason to Google the author before, even I can't know everything about this topic.

[Farley1324]

I won't pretend to know the answer to this post. You've hit the nail on the head I think.

But two things come to mind, just general thoughts:
Just because something takes a long time (like 100 years to have a gun law take effect) doesn't always mean it's not worth doing.
Legislation that improves the quality of living in this country in effect legislates away crime if it prevents people from feeling the need to take these kinds of actions.

The Constitution of the United States of American says that a gun ban is not worth doing.

Nothing against improving the quality of life in this country. Always a good idea.

[VoxExMachina]

Just because something takes a long time (like 100 years to have a gun law take effect) doesn't always mean it's not worth doing.

That would be true....if it actually had an effect. That's an awful long time to wait, and in the mean time you have the problem of what to do with all the guns already out there (if guns are actually the problem, and not the myriad of underlying causes we discussed the other day).

Legislation that improves the quality of living in this country in effect legislates away crime if it prevents people from feeling the need to take these kinds of actions.

And this is where "reality" gets in the way. There are many beneficial and/or necessary for people to own firearms, and not just for sport. Arguments could be made that hunting, for example, is actually required to keep deer populations in check. It's a known problem that arises regularly here in Michigan. And what about ranchers, or those in places like Alaska where the wildlife still rules, etc?

So is "quality of life" really improved? It might be in the context of an inner city, but not everywhere. Where do you draw the lines?

[Hishiad]

Lencho, what do you teach in school (besides Advanced *******ry)?

ROFL only post worth reading in the last 3 pages.


A. I think teachers having guns in K-12 is retarded.

B. I have an irrigation issue in my basement, so I'm going to rent a trench digger and put in a proper draining system, anyone (GF?) have experience with this?

[Lencho]

This has got to be the best Saturday night Rant of all time.


OF ALL TIME!!11!!1!

[Farley1324]

ROFL only post worth reading in the last 3 pages.


A. I think teachers having guns in K-12 is retarded.

B. I have an irrigation issue in my basement, so I'm going to rent a trench digger and put in a proper draining system, anyone (GF?) have experience with this?

A. Why?

B. No. Have no basement.

[theshoupguy]

B. I have an immigration issue in my basement, so I'm going to rent a trench digger

Man, I'm misreading things left and right tonight.

[Hola Bola]

Wtf kind of middle name is Eaglebear?

The badass kind.

[kvk1]

Kavak, are you suggesting laws be changed? (srs)

Yes.

If so, what do you think will work?

Mandatory psychological screening/weapons training for anyone seeking firearms. Up the ATF funding and staff. Supplementally, institute newer and much harsher penalties for possessing illegal firearms. Overhaul the current and/or institute a newer blueprint to address mental health issues. Up the current enforcement laws with focus on keeping illegal firearms off circulation.

That's my basic and not-a-legislator starter list.

[ossizen]

ROFL only post worth reading in the last 3 pages.


A. I think teachers having guns in K-12 is retarded.

B. I have an irrigation issue in my basement, so I'm going to rent a trench digger and put in a proper draining system, anyone (GF?) have experience with this?

Even though we do have a constitutional right to bear arms, there are situations where it would not be prudent or appropriate to use a firearm. Common sense, folks. Common sense.

[mjw8204]

B. I have an irrigation issue in my basement, so I'm going to rent a trench digger and put in a proper draining system, anyone (GF?) have experience with this?

Really?

An irrigation issue? You're actually trying to tell us that you have a basement? Really?

You're seriously going to rent a trench digger? Is that really what you're telling us you're going to do?

What? A proper draining system? Surely that isn't what you're saying. Please tell me it isn't.

[VoxExMachina]

A. I think teachers having guns in K-12 is retarded.

I don't really think teachers having guns is the answer, but I have to admit it at least sounds like something that could be implemented, and therefore has more basis in reality than wishing problems away. IE: it's a concrete idea based on a specific problem.

(Personally, I think it would be better to just hire more police, and dedicate some to the schools themselves if you were going to go that route.)

[theshoupguy]

The badass kind.

Not with a first name like Sammie.

Might as well have been named Jimmy Godzillashark.

[Final_Rep]

The Constitution of the United States of American says that a gun ban is not worth doing.

I believe nothing is incontrovertible or excluded from healthy skepticism and the ongoing process evaluation and consideration, the Constitution included. That's self-evident in the amount of amendments it has had since its creation.

[kvk1]

It is a school that was violently attacked, and many students + faculty/staff were killed. Further, the book discusses what might be able to effectively prevent/mitigate this kind of thing from happening.

I don't see how it doesn't relate to this discussion.

Beslan took place in the middle of the Russia/Chechnya conflict paradigm.

The comparison to our civil society doesn't stand.

I never had a reason to Google the author before, even I can't know everything about this topic.

You'll find that it's good practice to always research the author of anything you read to get a better idea of their agenda. Otherwise, that's the definition of "being told what you think."

This has got to be the best Saturday night Rant of all time.


OF ALL TIME!!11!!1!

lol

[Farley1324]

Yes.



Mandatory psychological screening/weapons training for anyone seeking firearms. Up the ATF funding and staff. Supplementally, institute newer and much harsher penalties for possessing illegal firearms. Overhaul the current and/or institute a newer blueprint to address mental health issues. Up the current enforcement laws with focus on keeping illegal firearms off circulation.

That's my basic and not-a-legislator starter list.

What would the weapons training accomplish? How does that relate to the mass/school shootings? Other than, potentially, making the shooters more skilled and accurate, that is.

What qualifies as an illegal firearm? How does that relate to the school/mass shootings?

Again, what qualifies as an illegal firearm?

[Lencho]

Yes.



Mandatory psychological screening/weapons training for anyone seeking firearms.

Uh oh.


"Sir, you're too f*cked in the head to own a firearm."


"Sweet!"


*scurries off to file for government benefits*

[ossizen]

Mandatory psychological screening/weapons training for anyone seeking firearms.

Many states already have that in place (e.g. both Kansas and Missouri)

[Farley1324]

You'll find that it's good practice to always research the author of anything you read to get a better idea of their agenda. Otherwise, that's the definition of "being told what you think."

What, from that book, do you disagree with?

What, from that book, has been found to be inaccurate?

[Miketoc]

The Constitution of the United States of American says that a gun ban is not worth doing.

I don't like the constitution argument. Guns were pretty necessary for everyone back then with very real possibility of military oppression. Constitution has been changed, it's just a piece of paper.

And this is where "reality" gets in the way. There are many beneficial and/or necessary for people to own firearms, and not just for sport. Arguments could be made that hunting, for example, is actually required to keep deer populations in check. It's a known problem that arises regularly here in Michigan. And what about ranchers, or those in places like Alaska where the wildlife still rules, etc?

So is "quality of life" really improved? It might be in the context of an inner city, but not everywhere. Where do you draw the lines?

Don't really need hand guns to kill wildlife. But yeah, where do you draw it?

Speaking of Alaska, everyone has a gun up there...like, everyone. Pretty much no regulation either. Also happens to be state with the most shootings per capita.

[kvk1]

What, from that book, do you disagree with?

What, from that book, has been found to be inaccurate?

[Lencho]

Not with a first name like Sammie.

Might as well have been named Jimmy Godzillashark.

"My name is Jimmy Godzillashark, and I'm here to do the devil's work."

[kvk1]

Fuck me.

It's Sunday.

I hate you people.

[ossizen]

What would the weapons training accomplish? How does that relate to the mass/school shootings? Other than, potentially, making the shooters more skilled and accurate, that is.

What qualifies as an illegal firearm? How does that relate to the school/mass shootings?

Again, what qualifies as an illegal firearm?

The guns involved were legally obtained by the mother (correct me if i'm wrong: 9mm and rifle). Her son stole them from her.

How effective were the gun-free zones in Littleton, CO? Viriginia Tech?

[Hishiad]

Man, I'm misreading things left and right tonight.

That wouldn't be an issue, I could have the ditch dug already if that was the case

[Farley1324]

I don't like the constitution argument. Guns were pretty necessary for everyone back then with very real possibility of military oppression. Constitution has been changed, it's just a piece of paper.

Then if you want to infringe upon/remove the RKBA, change the Constitution/change the Second Amendment. That is a viable alternative. But ignoring the Constitution and passing legislation that violates it is not the way to go.




So, are you going to quote where I said always/never? I'm becoming more and more convinced that you just made all that up and put words in my mouth in order to come up with some kind of a point.

[Hishiad]

A. Why?

How many schools K-12 exist in the United State of America?

[VoxExMachina]

Mandatory psychological screening/weapons training for anyone seeking firearms. Up the ATF funding and staff. Supplementally, institute newer and much harsher penalties for possessing illegal firearms. Overhaul the current and/or institute a newer blueprint to address mental health issues. Up the current enforcement laws with focus on keeping illegal firearms off circulation.

I think the psychological screening would be tough to implement. Cost and availability of professional psychiatrists aside, I'd be skeptical that you could really detect those who'd do something like this. After all, we always hear about those who were closest to the perpetrators say "I had no idea...I never would have guessed." Or what about someone who is perfectly normal today but gets clinically depressed or whatever after owning a gun for several years?

I'd agree about funding the ATF and working harder to make sure illegal weapons get collected, but then again look at how well the war on drugs goes. A certain amount of drugs are caught, but even more slips through the cracks.

Not trying to disagree with you, or belittle what you're saying. Just saying that I'm not sure how effective it would really be.

[ossizen]

The badass kind.

Could be worse. One could have a middle name of Hashtag.