So what do we do?

 

So far these are our options from some posters.

 

1. Throw our hands in the air.

2. Stick our head in the sand.

3. Arm everybody.

4. Scream "it's not the gun's fault."

Well I certainly don't want to go your route and punish law abiding citizens. What you don't seem to be able to admit or simply don't realize is that there is no simple solution. That's what we've actually been saying but you choose to pretend otherwise and act as though we don't care. Truth be told responsible gun owners want solutions, just not useless knee-jerk band-aids that will stop nothing and serve no purpose. You just seem to want something to happen quick regardless of what it is. That's just a poor way of looking at any situation.

I trust government far more than I trust the gun and ammo makers who pull the NRA's strings.

 

As far as what you bolded: I've always found it confusing why gun owners go bonkers over this or that when they have the protection of their own amendment to the Constitution as well as a sympathetic Supreme Court majority. What else do they need?

 

Well I certainly don't want to go your route and punish law abiding citizens. What you don't seem to be able to admit or simply don't realize is that there is no simple solution. That's what we've actually been saying but you choose to pretend otherwise and act as though we don't care. Truth be told responsible gun owners want solutions, just not useless knee-jerk band-aids that will stop nothing and serve no purpose. You just seem to want something to happen quick regardless of what it is. That's just a poor way of looking at any situation.

 

I am a responsible gun owner, and I want something to happen.

I want to prove that I have the training and reliability to own and possess a gun.

 

Much like I am proud that I have the certification to do my job and many don't.

 

What you are not ready to admit is there may be something we can do to lower the cost of this epidemic that doesn't take away from responsible people.

Well I certainly don't want to go your route and punish law abiding citizens. What you don't seem to be able to admit or simply don't realize is that there is no simple solution. That's what we've actually been saying but you choose to pretend otherwise and act as though we don't care. Truth be told responsible gun owners want solutions, just not useless knee-jerk band-aids that will stop nothing and serve no purpose. You just seem to want something to happen quick regardless of what it is. That's just a poor way of looking at any situation.

 

No, there isn't.

 

But when are we allowed to talk about it?

@B-Ball-fan, do we not see speed limit laws broken daily...everywhere? Do we not see people killed by speeding vehicles daily? I guarantee you you're safer around responsible gun owners than you are in your car at any given time. Yet, the constant knee jerk response by the left, ant-gun crowd is to pass laws that will only affect those that abide by the law to begin with. Look at drugs. TOTALLY illegal, but low and behold, we have a rampant drug problem in this country. Which by the way, @mcpapa, were number one there! Where's your outcry? Something to be proud of, right @B-Ball-fan? Yet most of you don't want to see that a vast majority of gun deaths in this country is caused by drugs and gangs that sell drugs. No, that's not the message you want to send. It's the guns. Can't be the drugs. Can't be gangs. Can't be criminals. Can't be mental illness. It's guns and gun owners that are the problem. At least B-Ball-fan realizes mental health is an issue, but he still seems to have the urge to punish the many for the sins of a few. I have no problem with background checks to try to eliminate mentally ill people from getting guns, but I sure don't want the government to control it or have their hand in it because I know what that will lead to.

 

 

 

B-Ball-fan, how can you not detect anyone in this thread wanting to take guns away. TTP said as much, "Australia's gun-control measures have been cited as an example for the United States to follow. Wishful thinking, in all probability" was his quote followed by "whatever works".

 

All in all to most of your points, B-Ball-fan, at the end of the day, how will background checks and limitations being stiffer stop criminals? How can you regulate a sick mind? How can you keep someone from passing a mental health check from snapping later? The answer is, you can't.

 

You got all of that from what I said? There's a lot of scattered assumptions about my views in your response.

 

For starters I think you missed the point that I was making with the speed limits comparisons.

 

Sure, I'll be the first to tell you that people fudge driving rules all the time. I even said so in my post when I said

 

"The way people foolishly cross the street or drive recklessly makes it all too apparent that civil disobedience isn't just a product of the mentally ill"

 

...and I'll include that there's not a time that I'm out driving where I don't see it on a regular basis, but my point was that sometimes rules of the road need to be adjusted for safety reasons, just as the guns rules should be adjusted for safety reasons. Neither is taking away anyone's privileges, but evaluating the circumstances and applying necessary measures.

 

Sure there are some who might ignore the flashing yellow light and speed limit sign, and some might just be so downright ignorant that they don't even know what they mean, or know to anticipate it when driving through certain areas, but for the most part any one with half a brain typically gets it, understands it, and abides by it.

 

Just because in my previous already long post I didn't address drugs, gangs, and guns it would be a huge leap to assume that I don't see them as problems. I didn't know that I was required to display an outcry about it.

 

I realize that no matter what rules are in place for just about anything there will be those who break them. Still for the betterment of a civilized organized society you still have to put them in place and do our best to enforce them.

 

I don't have a ready made solution, and I realize that certain adjustments won't cure all, but evaluating the situation with the hopes to at least create a better environment with regards to it isn't really too crazy of a goal.

 

There are so many determiners that contribute to our out of whack culture, and I'd be idealistic to think that we're ever going to completely correct everything, but it's still a worthy cause to do our best to at least make it the best that it possibly can be. Ignoring it is not an answer.

 

Interpret all the various post entries from everyone how you wish, but without rereading them all again, the general vibe that I'm picking up from most are that people see the present situation to be problematic, and wish for adjustments to be made in search of more practical and safer solutions.

 

Your thread has given me a great idea.

 

I'll start a thread where I'm pretty sure that most everyone is bound to espouse many various angles on the topic, with even some presenting opposing views to mine, and then act surprised when they do even though I knew going in that this would happen, and then I'll have a conniption fit when all points of view don't echo mine.

 

It may seem odd that one would purposely look to instigate opposing views, but with what is completely apparent regarding this thread, congratulations because it appears that you have succeeded in getting exactly what you set out to get.

TwoToPlace, what would you add or subtract from my post listed below? Thanks.....

I agree with shoring up the background checks, background checks for all gun purchases gun shows included, having HIPPA changed so there is a more detailed background check to search for any possible mental health issues. Mental illness and drug addiction are a huge issue as you stated, and this has been long overdue to mend them. I have no issues with bringing up these issues after a tragedy, as we have to start somewhere to get the discussion going. But, I do not see a need for a limit on guns, ammo, or capacity.

You got all of that from what I said? There's a lot of scattered assumptions about my views in your response.

 

For starters I think you missed the point that I was making with the speed limits comparisons.

 

Sure, I'll be the first to tell you that people fudge driving rules all the time. I even said so in my post when I said

 

"The way people foolishly cross the street or drive recklessly makes it all too apparent that civil disobedience isn't just a product of the mentally ill"

 

...and I'll include that there's not a time that I'm out driving where I don't see it on a regular basis, but my point was that sometimes rules of the road need to be adjusted for safety reasons, just as the guns rules should be adjusted for safety reasons. Neither is taking away anyone's privileges, but evaluating the circumstances and applying necessary measures.

 

Sure there are some who might ignore the flashing yellow light and speed limit sign, and some might just be so downright ignorant that they don't even know what they mean, or know to anticipate it when driving through certain areas, but for the most part any one with half a brain typically gets it, understands it, and abides by it.

 

Just because in my previous already long post I didn't address drugs, gangs, and guns it would be a huge leap to assume that I don't see them as problems. I didn't know that I was required to display an outcry about it.

 

I realize that no matter what rules are in place for just about anything there will be those who break them. Still for the betterment of a civilized organized society you still have to put them in place and do our best to enforce them.

 

I don't have a ready made solution, and I realize that certain adjustments won't cure all, but evaluating the situation with the hopes to at least create a better environment with regards to it isn't really too crazy of a goal.

 

There are so many determiners that contribute to our out of whack culture, and I'd be idealistic to think that we're ever going to completely correct everything, but it's still a worthy cause to do our best to at least make it the best that it possibly can be. Ignoring it is not an answer.

 

Interpret all the various post entries from everyone how you wish, but without rereading them all again, the general vibe that I'm picking up from most are that people see the present situation to be problematic, and wish for adjustments to be made in search of more practical and safer solutions.

 

Your thread has given me a great idea.

 

I'll start a thread where I'm pretty sure that most everyone is bound to espouse many various angles on the topic, with even some presenting opposing views to mine, and then act surprised when they do even though I knew going in that this would happen, and then I'll have a conniption fit when all points of view don't echo mine.

 

It may seem odd that one would purposely look to instigate opposing views, but with what is completely apparent regarding this thread, congratulations because it appears that you have succeeded in getting exactly what you set out to get.

 

A. Well said.

2. Now you know.

D. Many of us do. It's the nature of said adjustments that is the sticking point.

 

And lastly - was there any doubt?

I am a responsible gun owner, and I want something to happen.

I want to prove that I have the training and reliability to own and possess a gun.

 

Much like I am proud that I have the certification to do my job and many don't.

 

What you are not ready to admit is there may be something we can do to lower the cost of this epidemic that doesn't take away from responsible people.

I don't know whether you own guns or not and frankly I don't really care. Your posts often fall in line with someone more anti-gun than pro gun.

 

How did you come to that conclusion? I would love to come to a solution that would save lives and not affect lawful gun owners. The guys like you, mcpapa and TTP just want anything done simply in the name of doing something. That's just unacceptable and a poor way of handling things as I said before.

No, there isn't.

 

But when are we allowed to talk about it?

 

Going the TTP route I see. Pointless to continue with nonsense like that. Get back to me when you want to be serious.

You got all of that from what I said? There's a lot of scattered assumptions about my views in your response.

 

For starters I think you missed the point that I was making with the speed limits comparisons.

 

Sure, I'll be the first to tell you that people fudge driving rules all the time. I even said so in my post when I said

 

"The way people foolishly cross the street or drive recklessly makes it all too apparent that civil disobedience isn't just a product of the mentally ill"

 

...and I'll include that there's not a time that I'm out driving where I don't see it on a regular basis, but my point was that sometimes rules of the road need to be adjusted for safety reasons, just as the guns rules should be adjusted for safety reasons. Neither is taking away anyone's privileges, but evaluating the circumstances and applying necessary measures.

 

Sure there are some who might ignore the flashing yellow light and speed limit sign, and some might just be so downright ignorant that they don't even know what they mean, or know to anticipate it when driving through certain areas, but for the most part any one with half a brain typically gets it, understands it, and abides by it.

 

Just because in my previous already long post I didn't address drugs, gangs, and guns it would be a huge leap to assume that I don't see them as problems. I didn't know that I was required to display an outcry about it.

 

I realize that no matter what rules are in place for just about anything there will be those who break them. Still for the betterment of a civilized organized society you still have to put them in place and do our best to enforce them.

 

I don't have a ready made solution, and I realize that certain adjustments won't cure all, but evaluating the situation with the hopes to at least create a better environment with regards to it isn't really too crazy of a goal.

 

There are so many determiners that contribute to our out of whack culture, and I'd be idealistic to think that we're ever going to completely correct everything, but it's still a worthy cause to do our best to at least make it the best that it possibly can be. Ignoring it is not an answer.

 

Interpret all the various post entries from everyone how you wish, but without rereading them all again, the general vibe that I'm picking up from most are that people see the present situation to be problematic, and wish for adjustments to be made in search of more practical and safer solutions.

 

Your thread has given me a great idea.

 

I'll start a thread where I'm pretty sure that most everyone is bound to espouse many various angles on the topic, with even some presenting opposing views to mine, and then act surprised when they do even though I knew going in that this would happen, and then I'll have a conniption fit when all points of view don't echo mine.

 

It may seem odd that one would purposely look to instigate opposing views, but with what is completely apparent regarding this thread, congratulations because it appears that you have succeeded in getting exactly what you set out to get.

Since you once again gave the War and Peace version, I will respond to this later I don't have the time to go over all this now. I'll get back to you on all your points when I have time.

A. Well said.

2. Now you know.

D. Many of us do. It's the nature of said adjustments that is the sticking point.

 

And lastly - was there any doubt?

 

To this and of course the original post I will simply say that I'm not surprised that you both want to make it personal rather than what it was originally about. You guys went off the rails a long way back, the video hasn't even been discussed in I couldn't even say how many posts. But that's okay, I'm used to the way the typical suspects do business.

Going the TTP route I see. Pointless to continue with nonsense like that. Get back to me when you want to be serious.

 

When are we allowed to talk about it? How much time is acceptable after a multiple firearms murder? Because if that is the gold standard, it will never get done.

 

Which is what ol' cynical papa believes many want.

 

Case in point of the silliness by you and a few others. I honestly don't know why you guys even venture into these threads, it's like debating on lhe grade school playground.

To this and of course the original post I will simply say that I'm not surprised that you both want to make it personal rather than what it was originally about. You guys went off the rails a long way back, the video hasn't even been discussed in I couldn't even say how many posts. But that's okay, I'm used to the way the typical suspects do business.

 

I feel your pain.:lol:

 

And regarding the OP, I thought that the video was a clever way to push an agenda.

Case in point of the silliness by you and a few others. I honestly don't know why you guys even venture into these threads, it's like debating on lhe grade school playground.

 

I feel your pain.:lol:

 

If the answer is short, it's infantile. If it's long, it's War and Peace and can't be answered without an exhaustive Google search.