Gun regulation thread w. poll.
- Thread starter aceattorney
- Start date
Right off the bat, there is already a huge problem with his argument. He never addressed the fact that there are things other than method of gun control that affect and raise murder per capita. Just because the United States already has a low murder rate does not mean that stronger gun control won't help lower that murder rate any more than it is. He's making a very one-dimensional correlation between gun control and murder per capita, and that is very insensible. Because Pakistan is always going to have a high murder rate regardless of gun control, and we all know why that is. He's not address any of the other variables that correlate to gun violence.
Also he is caught stating how gun control has little effect by pointing how Texas has less gun problems than Chicago but doesn't give an explanation beyond that. For all we know, Chicago had a huge gun problem and so gun laws were enacted there to reduce gun violence and did successful curb gun violence to a degree. And with Texas, we could just say that they never enacted more gun laws because they simple didn't have a problem to begin with.
If he was smart, he would have shown how Chicago's gun violence was affected over the years before and after the strict gun laws. That way, he avoids assuming Chicago and Texas are the same environment, and you get to see an actual example of gun control's effect on a US territory.
Last edited:
Guns aren't the problem in America. Americans are. Are there countries worst than America? Yes but America still has a lot to improve! If a country can be loaded with guns and not kill others then they deserve guns. America clearly does not. If you disagree you're a psychopath because way more people are killed from buying guns legally than people protecting themselves or others with legally purchased weapons. Republicans need to just give in and put an end to this nonsense. How many more shootings do you need?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=1
A nice little sunday read by the NYTimes, time after time they show how most of the mass shooters got their firearms and how almost all of them passed a background check, very informative.
A nice little sunday read by the NYTimes, time after time they show how most of the mass shooters got their firearms and how almost all of them passed a background check, very informative.
More info
Shooter didn't use his evil AR, baby killing, 15 it was found in another room unfired
he just used handguns
all guns have been traced back to him as being legally owned
he passed every background check with flying colors
Shooter didn't use his evil AR, baby killing, 15 it was found in another room unfired
he just used handguns
all guns have been traced back to him as being legally owned
he passed every background check with flying colors
Considering neither of those are factors in school shootings....that would not prevent anything. Just another feel good measure that will have no results.
Its as about as useful as saying that the first step to reduce DUI deaths is to limit the amount alcohol a person can have in their home....
Let's start with this hypothetical. 2nd Amendment gets nerfed, and guns are banned in the US. What happens to all of the guns in possession? How did other civilized countries handle this?
Your comparison would be great but would be better if each alcoholic beverage was required to be registered by the state and you could only register one or two alcoholic beverages in your lifetime. And if getting caught with an alcoholic beverage printed with a serial number not registered under your name got you arrested for theft.
In AU all the law abiding people turned them in, all the bad guys kept them and even started to make their own years later. In America the only way to do it would be to go door to door and forcibly take every firearm away, this is why i say that would cause a civil war big time...
Let's play along with this ridiculous hypothetical scenario for a moment. The Constitution is amended and now requires most Americans to turn in their guns. You're confirming that a portion of gun owners would not follow the Constitution and that they would shed blood.
I'm not OK with people owning guns who willingly admit that they would kill to keep their illegal weapons. Sounds like hardcore gun culture is a borderline mental health issue. So much for that trope about a good guy with a gun and a bad guy with a gun, that's all in the mind of the beholder.
We ought to examine ways to screen for these sick individuals and prevent them from owning guns in the future.
You can't perceive any sane rationale for keeping a gun in a society that bans guns? lol
You're that blinded by your ideology?
What if the police disarmed like in the UK? Isn't that what makes American gun owners so paranoid? The government arming up and giving leftover military hardware and drones to the police? I think some of our SWAT Teams could take over a small country with what they have.
Using your logic, this nation would still be under the thumb of the British Empire. I think the more twisted mentality is that of yours...
I can not see a platform or route for americans being disarmed that doesn't lead to mass bloodshed and or only bad guys keeping them while the good guys turn them in.
what5 a great documentary on the subject if one has the time to watch it.
My logic? This is what morfeeis suggested numerous times.
My contribution is pointing out the sick mentality of some hardcore gun culture. Amassing large arsenals for defense, fantasies of the government coming for your guns, and promises of killing people in the name of freedom. Are you OK with people using firearms to keep their illegal guns? Maybe this is my so-called "twisted mentality" or "ideology" derp, but I'd rather not arm people who openly state they'd murder to keep them.
I can't think of subculture with attitudes and beliefs that are as violent.
I'm not for banning guns, but I don't see how people could be against tougher laws on obtaining them. This latest school shooter, had mental issues. Discharged from military, attended school for troubled teens, and had Aspergers.
Considering the dangers of guns, why can't people trying to obtain guns be required to take tests and be given some kind of psych eval test before granting access?
Why do some reality tv shows require contestants to have psych evals? Why are we tested to drive? Why are couples required to undergo crazy scrutiny to adopt? Why do employers do "behavior" interviews before even considering a 2nd interview? Why do we need to show ID to obtain cough medicine? and on and on.....yet so easy to obtain a killing device? No, I'm not an idealist. I don't think this would stop all murders, but s***....it'll stop some.
Studies already show that states with the least gun control laws have the most gun use. Very telling.
Considering the dangers of guns, why can't people trying to obtain guns be required to take tests and be given some kind of psych eval test before granting access?
Why do some reality tv shows require contestants to have psych evals? Why are we tested to drive? Why are couples required to undergo crazy scrutiny to adopt? Why do employers do "behavior" interviews before even considering a 2nd interview? Why do we need to show ID to obtain cough medicine? and on and on.....yet so easy to obtain a killing device? No, I'm not an idealist. I don't think this would stop all murders, but s***....it'll stop some.
Studies already show that states with the least gun control laws have the most gun use. Very telling.
if you include suicides yes, but if you look at homicides (which is what everybody keeps crying about) the direct opposite is true. Also the latest shooter passed 10 background checks, a lot of other shooters have too as was shown in a link a few post back. people can be just fine their entire life and then one day due to some imbalance just go off the deep end.
He wasn't discharged (of which there are several ways that can happen normally) from the military, he dropped out, there is a huge difference between the two. so you were ill informed or lied to, either way get your info correct
He attended a school that focused on people with learning disabilities of which a very large portion of the country has at this point.
The mental health issue came up when the mom was talking to a neighbor about him not being able to deal with a roach infested home (of which people would call me nuts to cause i couldn't live like that). he was never adjudicated and thus there was no legal reason he couldn't own firearms. if he was under the care of a therapist and they didn't report him, they should be sued but otherwise even with your safeguards in place he still would have access to firearms and thus this still would have happened.
Another thing to take into account is that a lot of people who have serious mental problem are not visible to the outside world, they are able to hide it most often in public and when being evaluated. My mother suffers from late onset general schizophrenia and to the outside world she is as normal as every other person, but if you catch her on a bad day she is bat s*** crazy (voices, disordered speech, a few other positive symptoms as well as lack of appropriate affect).
Am i saying he wasn't crazy? his actions prove that so no, that is not my argument. my point is that in order to keep him away from firearms you would have to keep them away from the vast majority of people in the US and thus what you are asking for is a BAN on firearms.
You go on psychotropic drugs sure i support you not owning a firearm as more often than not it is stated in their side effects that it causes homicidal as well as suicidal thoughts to become more prevalent based on your dosage.
Gone through court proceedings and found to be a r****d (IQ under 70 & other issues) sure you can't own firearms, but i also think you shouldn't be walking the street alone just as the above stated group.
basically anyone that isn't safe enough to own a firearm shouldn't be able to walk the streets with the rest of us.
No one is really crying about straight homicides from your average run of the mill criminal...you know, the ones that get guns illegally. For the most part, these folks usually target other criminals.
The ones people are crying about, are the ones that get guns legally, and commit mass murders. Your average run of the mill street criminal, are not shooting up schools, theaters, etc.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/2/chris-harper-mercer-was-discharged-from-army-penta/ :
“A review of Army records indicate that Christopher Sean Harper-Mercer was in service at Ft. Jackson, S.C., from 5 November-11 December 2008 but discharged for failing to meet the minimum administrative standards to serve in the U.S. Army,” the Pentagon said in a news release, CNNreported Friday.
He has Aspergers. Knowing, what we know about asperger sufferers, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to have guns. YOU don't know if additional safe guards would not have helped, because they are not in place. I don't claim to know whether or not psych exams would have helped in this situation, maybe it would have, maybe not. But who are you to claim that it would NEVER help?
Are you a shrink? yeah, there's plenty that can't be detected, but there's plenty that can be detected. My wife used to work for a psych office in Fl, you'd be surprised how many of the patients that were easily detected as having mental issues, and some baker acted....had legal guns.
Not close. Doctors know what to look out for. This isn't a means to stop all crazies from having a gun...but to stop some.
Ironically enough, there's a decrease in your average run of the mill criminals killing each other, we see every year that crime is dropping.....BUT, we're seeing an increase in killings from those owning guns legally. Chew on that for a bit.
God forbid we see an outcome that reduces suicides.
Anyway, permit to purchase systems are what we need. I mentioned this previously. The background system is flawed. It's been underfunded since day one, states are not required to submit data, it's been watered down through legal actions, there are quality issues with the data, and NICS criteria is too low to deny. No wonder people can pass who shouldn't.
Permit to purchase systems allow some local police to deny permits based on other information in addition to background checks. You can pass a background check if you were arrested numerous times, but not convicted for offenses including trafficking in cocaine, assault and battery, assault and battery on a police officer, resisting arrest, and destruction of property. Purchase permits allow the local police to prevent you from purchasing a gun. I'd be happy to see doctors have a say in that also.
http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-permit-to-purchase-permits-van-hollen-federal/
Anyway, permit to purchase systems are what we need. I mentioned this previously. The background system is flawed. It's been underfunded since day one, states are not required to submit data, it's been watered down through legal actions, there are quality issues with the data, and NICS criteria is too low to deny. No wonder people can pass who shouldn't.
Permit to purchase systems allow some local police to deny permits based on other information in addition to background checks. You can pass a background check if you were arrested numerous times, but not convicted for offenses including trafficking in cocaine, assault and battery, assault and battery on a police officer, resisting arrest, and destruction of property. Purchase permits allow the local police to prevent you from purchasing a gun. I'd be happy to see doctors have a say in that also.
http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-permit-to-purchase-permits-van-hollen-federal/
Well that is the vast number of homicide deaths in this country, hell more people die from being beaten to death then do via mass shooting a year. No to sound overly harsh, but from a statistical point of view mass shootings aren't that big of a deal.
So he washed out, that is still a far sight from dishonorable discharged, i'd say we were both misinformed as i read that he quit. my point still remains washing out isn't a sign of mental illness.
The percentage of people with asperger's who commit violent crimes in no larger than those with normal mental function, as a matter of fact people with mental illness are far more likely to be the victim of a crime that to perpetrate one. My point is your mesure will remove far more rights from people who never would have done anything wrong then those who will and i'm not comfortable with that.
not today but i will be in a MFT 16 months, so like with firearms i can usually tell when people are speaking from a point of ignorances. those who would commit such crimes as mass shooting, those who would plan it out and make sure to maximize their targets such as the last few shootings are the people that are able to hide in plain sight.
it takes hours upon hours to get to know a person, to get an idea of their baseline in order to find their signs and to tell when they are lying. sure there are simple indicators that can be used, but when talking about something that could get you sued most professionals will play it safe. add to that the added cost of being forced to spend hours with a psychologist , that amounts to a poll tax on an individual right, this would obligate the poor to pay big $$$ just to be able to protect themselves, add to that the cost of having to do it on an annual bases and you might as well just say poor people you no longer have a second amendment right.
Please provide a credible source that proves that because from what FBI crime stats say 2/3 of the people who die from homicides each year are felons with a long past of crimes. But that just sounds like a flat out made up stat on its face seeing that you just made a correlation to lower crime rates and an idea that criminals are no longer committing crimes against other criminals. are these legal gun owners putting down low life scum who are trying to attack them? because if that's the case i am happy i as well as them are alive due to having a firearm to chew on anything. add to that that if these legal gun owners were committing more crimes, crimes rates would be on the rise, sounds to me like more legally armed people are able to protect themselves, but i guess you'd rather they'd be an unarmed victim than an armed citizen.
Crap, I typed up a nice response about asperger patient's lacking empathy, criminally obtain guns usually being used on thug on thug crime (whereas legally obtain guns are used on innocent lives), etc (but accidentally went a screen back).....but honestly, I'm too tired to bother writing it up again.
Last edited: