Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 96

Thread: Too many gun deaths going on.........

  1. #41
    Senior Member Tradd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Suburban Midwest
    Posts
    6,224
    I'll cling to both my guns AND my religion, thankyouverymuch.

  2. #42
    rodeosweetheart
    Guest
    The UK stats are also surprising since there must have been 50 deaths in Midsummer alone. . .

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    So anyone who disagrees is a 'nut' and another 'class of people'?

    That sounds less like a principled argument for a restriction of gun rights and more like a condemnation of the majority of US citizens. I think that's why these discussions never go anywhere.
    This is why I generally avoid these threads now - too much name calling and affixing of certain negative character traits to anyone who chooses to have firearms even if gun ownership is just a small part of who we are as humans. Free would call me a "gun nut" and of a "certain class of people" - which I'm a assuming he means that in a negative way. Pinky Toe would say I "love guns" and seek violence rather than peacefulness solely because I own guns without having ever been involved in any violent actions. I am neither a gun nut, nor do I love my guns any more than I love any other piece of machined metal. I am not in any "class of people" who are characterized by as gun nuts, gun lovers, or violent people. I am a non-violent person. Like Pinky Toe and Free, I also abhor violence and killing of animals. And that would be in all forms of slaughter from a hammer to the crush the head or neck or electrocution, not just by gun. That's why I choose to be a vegan and anti-hunting. But yet I own guns. Time for me to leave this thread alone.

  4. #44
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    13,617
    Quote Originally Posted by Spartana View Post
    This is why I generally avoid these threads now - too much name calling and affixing of certain negative character traits to anyone who chooses to have firearms even if gun ownership is just a small part of who we are as humans. Free would call me a "gun nut" and of a "certain class of people" - which I'm a assuming he means that in a negative way. Pinky Toe would say I "love guns" and seek violence rather than peacefulness solely because I own guns without having ever been involved in any violent actions. I am neither a gun nut, nor do I love my guns any more than I love any other piece of machined metal. I am not in any "class of people" who are characterized by as gun nuts, gun lovers, or violent people. I am a non-violent person. Like Pinky Toe and Free, I also abhor violence and killing of animals. And that would be in all forms of slaughter from a hammer to the crush the head or neck or electrocution, not just by gun. That's why I choose to be a vegan and anti-hunting. But yet I own guns. Time for me to leave this thread alone.
    I agree, Spartana--which is why I made the comment about the emotional element of gun issues. It's a real hot button and unfortunately triggers the negativity and proclivity to warp or abandon the rational elements of the debate.

    I'm with ya on the outta here on this one!!
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  5. #45
    Senior Member peggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Simpler at Fifty View Post
    "No, I honestly feel that those with guns compromise less. They feel that ANY compromise at all, would remove their rights."

    @CathyA How would you propose guns be limited. I believe there is a 3 day waiting period now in many states. The honest people go through that and get their gun legally. The ones getting guns illegally- how would you limit that? How do you find out these bad guys have guns unless they commit a crime?
    Now there's a good question. And a good place to start. First of all, I seriously doubt there are 'thousands' of gun laws on the books, unless you are going state by state, county by county and town by town counting each and every areas 'regulations'. But that's kind of disingenuous in a discussion about effective gun laws to curb violence.

    It's also kind of the problem. Each state, county, town has their own laws and regulations, and there is no continuity. You can site statistics for one city in a well regulated state, but it means nothing when the criminal element can simply drive 20 miles down the road to another 'free for all' state.
    First, there needs to be simple, across the board regulations. Across the country, all states the same. There needs to be continuity. Traffic laws don't change state to state, and gun laws shouldn't either.

    Second, all gun purchases should be registered. All of them, including private sales, and/or sales at gun shows. This can be done quite easily. Every car must be registered and licensed, and every gun should be too. People should have to jump through at least as many hoops to buy a gun as they do to vote! lol

    What this registration does is curb so much of the illegal guns on the street.
    Here is an example. Now, a gun 'mule' goes to a gun show and buys tons of guns, then resells them to criminals on the street. No trace to the gun show or the mule. But with registration, we have a record of so and so buying the gun. We have the name of the last 'legal' owner of the gun.
    "But it was stolen", you say. Ok, where is the paper trail of that? When your gun is stolen, you make a police report, like you do when anything else is stolen. There. There is your record, and your alibi. If your gun is used in a crime, you better have proof that you weren't the last owner, and/or it was stolen, because the history of that gun is right there. And with this system, it will also be there if you have an unusual number of 'stolen' guns, or conduct a heck of a lot of private sales to criminals.

    This registration serves to protect the honest, responsible gun owner/collector in that HE/SHE now has a record of who THEY sold the gun to. I'm sure honest gun owners don't want to think their gun has been used in a crime and would be glad to help the police zero in on who is responsible.

    These two simple steps would go a long way, I think, in curbing violence with guns. Or certainly curb the number of guns on the streets. Would criminals still get guns? Of course they would. And people will still run red lights. But that isn't an excuse to just do away with traffic lights.
    But guns would be harder to get, and it would be easier to trace the source of the guns. And isn't that what everyone bemoans, and declares to be the problem? The SOURCE of the guns?
    These two things, too, WOULD be a compromise between the gun community and those of us against 'free for all' gun ownership.
    Simply waving your hand dismissively and declaring we want to 'ban' all guns is easy...and wrong.
    Actually working for a solution that curbs violence and protects gun rights is a bit more difficult.

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,460
    Very logical and reasonable argument Peggy, and one I completely agree with. See even us "nuts" are occasionally sane :-)!

  7. #47
    Helper Gregg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Macondo (or is that my condo?)
    Posts
    4,015
    Quote Originally Posted by peggy View Post
    First, there needs to be simple, across the board regulations. Across the country, all states the same. There needs to be continuity. Traffic laws don't change state to state, and gun laws shouldn't either.

    Second, all gun purchases should be registered. All of them, including private sales, and/or sales at gun shows. This can be done quite easily. Every car must be registered and licensed, and every gun should be too. People should have to jump through at least as many hoops to buy a gun as they do to vote! lol
    I don't agree with everything in your post peggy (surprised?), but I do appreciate the effort and thought that went into it. Looking at your two suggestions, which are both rational and sensible on the surface, I only really see one problem. The deal is that so many crimes are committed with guns that are not legally acquired and/or registered. I completely understand that the old "if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" saying gets tiresome at best, but that doesn't make it false.

    The black market for weapons is a huge enterprise that is inextricably intertwined with the global drug trade. Its primarily made up of gangs with thousands of members in hundreds of locations who have ties to the drug cartels. The cartels have ties to governments, eastern European manufacturers of weapons, international arms dealers, etc. Everything all those guys do is already illegal. In the end, eliminating the demand for their illicit products is the only thing that will make them go away, but for now the UN estimates illegal drugs are a $400 BILLION per year business that already operates completely outside the law. Out of 192 +/- countries in the world only 28 of them have a GDP of $400B or more. That is the real opposition. Until the demand changes there just aren't any laws we can pass that will stop these guys. They ignore laws and shoot the cops who try to enforce the laws. Not the kind of guys who are going to bother with registrations.

    Other than those really bad guys we have a much smaller, but still critical, problem with everyday folks shooting each other. I think every single one of us here would love to see the day when no one was ever a victim of violence again. We probably can't get there, but we can work to limit it. I don't have a study to cite, but it seems like most of the violent perps on the evening news did something illegal on their way to committing acts of violence. What I'm saying is that it might make more sense to actually enforce the laws we already have on the books to see if that works rather than passing even more laws that probably won't be enforced any better than the current batch is.
    "Back when I was a young boy all my aunts and uncles would poke me in the ribs at weddings saying your next! Your next! They stopped doing all that crap when I started doing it to them... at funerals!"

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,678
    I have to admit that I've never understood (or respected) the old "if we can't stop the criminals from getting guns, then we shouldn't bother with any measures that regulate the wrong non-criminals getting guns."

    I own a gun. I know how to use it. I'm educated and skilled. I don't give a damn if it requires some sort of tracking. I'm fine with someone denying me the ownership of a deadly weapon if I have proven I'm not to be trusted with it.

    I don't happen to see anything wrong with registering all firearms sold, everywhere, period. I don't see anything wrong with requiring basic education to own a device that can kill people easily just by its owner's ignorance, and I think that privilege should be able to be reconsidered if you prove yourself egregiously irresponsible with a weapon. I certainly don't see anything wrong with background checks, and restrictions on the purchase of guns by people with a history of mental illness, domestic violence, prior offenses with weapons, etc. All of these things might save lives and grow in our society a sane ethic around guns, yet the gun lobby not only fights against them with great vigor, but fights to relax laws, and make more and more deadly devices available to anyone, anywhere. I do not see this as a mark of a civilized society.

    No, it's not going to solve the problem of black market guns. But to not do something about the things we CAN move toward fixing, just because we can't fix it all, is just......well.....criminal in my mind.

  9. #49
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Always logged in
    Posts
    22,756
    I live near the ghetto and have property in the ghetto and I can assure you that when ch*t is stolen there, a police report does not follow. The Po'-lice are not involved. Whadaya think's gonna happen, homeowner's insurance will reimburse?

    But it is a nice and tidy theoretical outline of what should happen. Theory is lovely. Carry on.

    Meanwhile, peggy, do you ever watch Sons of Anarchy? That illustratess another entry point for guns into this country, SAMCO and The Irish and etc.

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by peggy View Post
    People should have to jump through at least as many hoops to buy a gun as they do to vote! lol
    What a brilliant idea Peggy! As soon as people have to start going through background checks to vote...come back with your other gun control ideas. I mean there are people in some States that don't think people should have to show their IDs when they go to vote...

    Have you ever bought a gun, Peggy?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •