So then be specific what do you want to do and how would it curb gun violence?

 

I'm no expert. Nobody (well, present company excepted) calls me and asks my opinion. But here goes. Some of it will admittedly be spitballing, but IMHO, even spitballing is better than doing zip. If you (not you specifically AT, the generic "you") are one of those "it's the price of freedom, we can't do a thing to change it" types, I have no use for you.

 

And I will preface this with where I'm coming from.

 

Fewer and safer guns in the hands of fewer bad people will result in less gun violence.

 

The argument that more guns in more people's hands will do the same is, in the immortal words of Mr. Spock, most illogical. I can't be convinced that one, all, or some combination of the following will help. There is no (to coin a phrase) magic bullet that will solve the problem. But it seems that each can in some way either reduce (I said reduce, not eliminate) the number of guns (A), increase the safety of guns (2), or give fewer access to guns (D).

 

1. Increased robustness of background checks. If this means increasing waiting times; universal background check for every gun sale (and federally criminalizing "gun trafficking), developing a more complete federal database of violent/domestic violence offenders, persons with restraining orders, seriously and violently mentally ill persons, so be it. (D).

 

2. Increased regulations of weapons and ammo. The purpose of these weapons and ammo is (to me, at any rate) to kill and/or maim humans, often in mass quantity. High-capacity magazines (10+? 15+?), hollow point bullets. I don't know what "assault weapons" are, and I believe that the proposal I saw outlined in another thread was stupidly inclusive; but there seem to be MANY weapons that can be, with a minimum of difficulty, modified to fire at a ridiculous rate. Question for those who know much more than me - did the assault weapon ban of the 1990s result in a reduction in crime using said weapons? (A) (2)

 

3. Gun safety technology. "Individualized guns and gun triggers." "Childproofing." May be pie in the sky, but we put a man on the moon in 1969 with technology no more advanced than a pocket calculator. (2)

 

4. I believe that there is a ban (crazy but true) on federal funding for research into the efficacy of gun violence proposals. Asinine. (A) (2) (D)

 

5. Eliminate internet purchases. Or at the very least, universally subject such sales to background checks. (A) (D)

 

6. I don't know what to do about this one. I hear all the time that having guns in the home make the home safer. Yet, having a gun in the home increases domestic violence risk, suicide risk, accidental shooting risk. I posted a link a while that spoke to this. Responsible gun ownership in critical, and I have no doubt that my BGP friends are practitioners, but many, many obviously are not. Stiffer penalties (instead of the "he/she has suffered enough" mentality) for parents/guardians who don't exercise proper judgement?

 

Just some thoughts. I'm sure each and every one can and will get shot down (to coin another phrase), but that's okay.:thumb:

I'm not sure why my name is on your list. I have articulated my position numerous times. Not one point that I've made was to take away the rights of the 2nd Ammendment. I HAVE said (sic) it would be no skin off my nose if it happened' date=' but I don't think it's necessary, nor what the solution is. But, I guess I'm either with you or against you, so that's what landed me on your list. And, at least I am in company I like there. [/quote']

 

Your candidate Hillary called the NRA her enemy, so unfortunately, we're oppositions on this topic.

Heard some sound bytes from the ObamaHall last night, a couple stood out. I paraphrase:

 

It's easier and cheaper for a teen to get a gun in America then it is for that teen to get a book

 

Hyperbole much? Please never accuse the right of fear mongering again.

 

I want to make it more expensive and more difficult to legally get a gun, then by supply and demand the number of guns will go down.

 

So like healthcare where people that had good coverage are now paying more to cover those that "couldn't" pay for coverage before, law abiding gun owners would have to pay more for their right to own a gun while having a negligible effect on criminal gun possessors.

Your candidate Hillary called the NRA her enemy, so unfortunately, we're oppositions on this topic.

 

And now you've decided my candidate for me. :lol2: You must not be reading my posts. I haven't decided on who I will support. The only scenario where Hillary is my candidate is if Trump is my only other choice.

And now you've decided my candidate for me. :lol2: You must not be reading my posts. I haven't decided on who I will support. The only scenario where Hillary is my candidate is if Trump is my only other choice.

Going to hold you to that :lol2:

In case you missed it in the other thread.

 

@mcpapa, I learned something today. I was going to correct you regarding your use of the phrase, "to coin a phrase." I was only aware of its original use which meant "to create a new phrase." Current use also allows the meaning "to introduce a cliche' sentiment", which is what you did. I was unaware of this use of the phrase until checking it out.

 

Regarding your proposed gun regulations: there is a certain logic to it and I appreciate you stating your point of view. I do disagree on principle. The more effective means to reduce the number of bad people with guns is to make bad people good. That is not the job of government. Rather, it is the job of families, faith communities, and culture-influencers. The role for the government in this is to encourage families, faith communities, and culture-influencers in their morality building work and stop undermining it.

 

Unfortunately, the result of greater regulations is to take the power out of the hands of the people and give it to the government. This is a huge mistake as understood well by our founding fathers. It leads to tyranny. Our constitutional rights were written to prevent the tyranny of government because it is the centralization of power that is the most direct route to corruption. The maximization of individual freedom is the protection against this tyranny. You obviously can't legislate every freedom but the Constitution and Bill of Rights guarantee a necessary core of freedoms. We chip away at them to our own long-term peril. The responsibility of citizens in a free society is to act morally. Without the people being moral, there is no way to safe-guard freedom. We see the problem in our society now as a result of the erosion of our cultural and moral foundation. But the answer is not the increase of the power of government. That is like asking the proverbial fox to guard the henhouse, to borrow a phrase that was "coined" by someone else.

 

We must not allow fear to drive our policies regarding gun regulation. People are all too eager to give up freedom when they are motivated fear. In this case the fear of terrorists, the mentally ill, and guns.

 

What I am saying highlights that there is a fundamental disagreement of approach to the problem that makes common ground difficult to achieve. As I have stated often in other threads, if you don't address the real problem, you cannot find its solution. The problem is not guns. The problem is in the heart and mind of people who are so depraved they are willing to take the life of another human being. You can't surmount this problem with more regulation, especially when that regulation is NOT directed at the actual problem, but at one symptom of the problem.

 

Do not threaten another American's freedom because of the immoral actions of someone else.

Here is a simple take on this by my good friend Rex McClanahan who owns Buds Gun Shop. I will copy and paste his Facebook post and then provide a link:

 

So my nearly 8yr old son overhears a call in the car this morning (darn Bluetooth phone systems) and later asks me what "Politically Correct" means.

Caught completely off guard, I told him something like....."politically correct is what some people use because they don't know (or at least don't want to admit) what correct actually is". He then asked me if those people were "stupid" ?.....and I said "yes son, they are, but you know your mother does not like you to use that word." smile emoticon

I spent a good part of this past week answering questions from TV and newspaper reporters about Obama's speech and gun control. I certainly don't have all the answers, but some of their questions seemed so simple I actually became paranoid why they were even asking me ? Were they trying to bait me into making certain comments just to make a good story ? It turns out that most of what I had to say never made TV or the papers, as they cut hours of interview time down to just a few minutes for TV. I don't blame them, I really did not have anything new or exciting to say. I do not believe in gun control and don't believe guns kill people any more than I do knives or drugs kill people. People do use these devices, and many others, to harm or kill themselves and other people. The problem is (in my opinion) people, and the problem is getting worse all the time. Politicians, in their politically correct way, claim the issues are "complicated". I personally don't think it is complicated at all. Thou Shalt Not Kill. It's one of the Ten Commandments .....not the "Ten Suggested Commandments", or "Ten Commandments For Your Consideration", or any other diluted politically correct version. It is a direct Commandment from GOD, Thou Shalt Not Kill. Seriously, what is complicated about that ? If people continue to allow GOD and his Commandments to be pulled out of our schools, government, lives and world in the interest of being "politically correct" ?.....then even my young son already has the fate of those "intellectually challenged" people figured out. I would have just called them "stupid" like he did, but then that would not be politically correct.

 

https://www.facebook.com/rex.mcclanahan.9/posts/10206775615943197?fref=nf

 

 

 

We must not allow fear to drive our policies regarding gun regulation. People are all too eager to give up freedom when they are motivated fear. In this case the fear of terrorists, the mentally ill, and guns.

 

.

 

While you said a ton, this stood out to me, because this is exactly what I feel those who are resistant to any changes in Gunn laws are doing. The prevalent argument is fear of the government, fear of other people (the bad guys), fear of outsiders (immigrants, etc.). The very premise of the argument is all about fear and distrust.

While you said a ton, this stood out to me, because this is exactly what I feel those who are resistant to any changes in Gunn laws are doing. The prevalent argument is fear of the government, fear of other people (the bad guys), fear of outsiders (immigrants, etc.). The very premise of the argument is all about fear and distrust.

 

Not for me, really. Its about a constitutional right.

 

Safe to say President Obama was unaware how inept our Congress really is because of zero term limits and special interests. (My House Rep just filed for his 19th term).

 

He was wrong and realizes it now, and the next president better realize this too.

Safe to say President Obama was unaware how inept our Congress really is because of zero term limits and special interests. (My House Rep just filed for his 19th term).

 

He was wrong and realizes it now, and the next president better realize this too.

 

Obama has made all his supporters some of the best defense attorneys in America.

Safe to say President Obama was unaware how inept our Congress really is because of zero term limits and special interests. (My House Rep just filed for his 19th term).

 

He was wrong and realizes it now, and the next president better realize this too.

 

You do realize the founding fathers separated powers precisely for this reason. We have an executive not a king or dictator.

Safe to say President Obama was unaware how inept our Congress really is because of zero term limits and special interests. (My House Rep just filed for his 19th term).

 

He was wrong and realizes it now, and the next president better realize this too.

 

Agree on term limits. But Obama is as inept as Congress. He has no leadership skills.