Discussion in 'Cast & Blast' started by Alex MacDonald, Jan 31, 2013.
Looks like the WH is now supporting gun ownership
"Have seen marked police and WDFW vehicles broken into and firearms stolen from them."
Do you suppose Kerlikowski's weapon was ever recovered? What a Maroon!
A good thread and good post.
I don't know. I wish I did. There are numerous discussions to have on this subject, American gun culture, values, social break down, etc. But the one I keep coming back to is, how is it that many Americans believe we can solve the problem by passing gun control laws, when by all objective analyses it won't and doesn't. If objective analysis fails, then subjective, visceral analysis must be what people are using, which is my way of saying that emotional, feel good efforts are necessary, even though it doesn't change the outcome.
Frankly I'm more afraid of a nation consisting of so many who analyze by emotion rather than logic than I am of the next school shooting, which we logically know is statistically an infrequent but highly dramatic event.
It may be infrequent but one child slaughtered is one to many. It seems to me that these infrequencies are becoming more frequent and that is the concern I have. How many children have to be slaughtered before it is time to try to address this issue, 1, 10, 100. Last year it was a theater and a school that I know of and I'm from Canada maybe I've missed some. I agree that emotions play a role in the thinking process but logic tells me this slaughtering of innocent people has to end some how. Hopefully it's not to the point of no return.
Its because the data and facts do not support that reducing the quantity and type will have a direct impact on diminishing the murder rate. More people die each year through the use of blunt objects than from rifles including those that are deemed assult rifles. Handguns make up the majority of murders and the sad truth is that there are more than plenty handguns in circulation today where a criminal can get his hands on one to commit a crime. Making it hard or impossible for legal and sane law abiding Americans to buy guns to protect themselves and their familes only make it easier for criminals to commit violent crimes.
The fact is if Adam Lanza and James Holmes used their mom's Yukon Denali loaded with extra cans of gas to crash into a movie theater or kindergarten then gun control would not even be hot topic right now. The focus would be on metal health, violence in entertainment, championing criminals on the news, etc. Since this administration needs a derailment from balancing the budget right now, gun control is the major focus.
We can agree that one child killed is one too many, and then look at the statistics. Oh, one or more children are killed every day in the U.S. We can say it's too many, no matter the number, but the genie is out of the bottle. There are between 250 and 300 million firearms in circulation in the U.S., with 311 million people. The genie cannot be put back in the bottle, short of massive gun confiscation. And no politician is proposing that. Instead measures that will have no measurable effect in reducing firearm murder are proposed by often well-intentioned people who have to be thinking with their hearts and not with their heads. That's why I called it emotional, feel good measures. Except one. Universal background checks for all arms, not just handguns, and private as well as dealer sales, does have the potential to reduce firearm fatalities, but most likely the number would be small. And then only if the law is well enforced. As Alex points out in his initial post, the existing requirements are not consistently enforced.
It's not that many, if any, of us don't want to address the issue. It's just that we are thinking logically and don't want to pretend to address firearm murder with feel good emotional measures that clearly will not measurably affect the outcome.
You may be right that more people die from a blunt object, but how many times do 20 children and 6 teachers get slaughtered in a school in minutes from a blunt object? Or if a nutcase entered a theater with a blunt object and started assaulting people how long would he last before someone took him down and would there have been any deaths.
In fact I have never used the term gun control. What I have said and am saying again is that this is a complex issue that requires all options to be on the table.
I don't believe this is a conspiracy to get rid of guns or to take attention off the budget. I truly believe that most Americans and Canadians are sick and tired of innocent people being slaughtered and that is why the debate is going on. The fact that school children are involved only made people more passionate to try to change things.
This is the point I keep coming back to in my thinking. That ship has sailed. Even if another gun was never purchased ever again, how long till we'd actually see a reduction? Decades? Centuries?
On top of this we have the simple fact that banning things rarely works well in this country. Prohibition brought us organized crime. The 'war on drugs' has brought us gangs (and cartels in other countries). I'm not saying the reverse--unrestricted access-- is always the best case. But it's hard to make the case that if millions of americans want something, making it illegal reduces crime.
There's also the minor fact that most of the gun violence in this country is crime-related--criminal on criminal or otherwise involving criminal enterprise--drugs, trafficking, etc. So we're talking about a segment that already disrespects the law and/or specializing in trafficking illegal things. I bet a ban is really going to help there.
I'd like to see mental health care become much more widely available and much more affordable. I would like to see an honest attempt to enforce existing laws, and ratchet up the punishment for trafficking of guns--straw purchases, family/friends buying for or giving to others, etc. I realize that's asking something from the same agency that shipped guns to the cartels in mexico, but I digress.
gun registration just ended in Canada because it did not work. I know RCMP has been seeing an increase in firearms related violence including handguns violence. Virtually impossible to legally own a handgun in Canada.
England, Australia, Chicago seeing the same increase in violence even though ownership of firearms is highly regulated.
Stated before but the rural homes where I grew up had multiple firearms in it Openly displayed on gun racks and /or glass door cabinets. No one locked their homes or vehicles. Every truck in the high school parking lot had 2 to 3 shotguns rifles displayed in the rear window rack. Zero firearms related violence.
I think that is a clue that firearms are not the problem.
If you really what to end all the senseless whole sale killings in the world all you need to do is ban religion. In all the centuries of recorded history more people have been killed in the name of god than for any other reason. Thats what our current war on terrorism is all about, the oil is just a side bennifit
No, I'm sure no one in DC plays politics, that's just a rumor spread by Tea Baggers. If you're truly worried about even one child "being slaughtered" check and see how many Canadian children died today in drunk driving "accidents". Then see how light the punishment is for killing an innocent child that way. Gonna give up your booze? Your car? But it's not on your gun scared radar is it? I say bullshit...every bleeding heart gun scared weenie out there thinks the government is gonna make life safer. Ha! The US government is now the largest weapons dealer in the world. How many Afghan children have died as collateral damage from drone strikes? What does the DHS need hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition for? Target practice? Not the high performance ammo they're buying. There's a lot of questions you need to investigate before you get all warm and fuzzy about the US Government. And if you think for a minute this shit won't spill over into Canada, you're nuts. Stick with what BC folks know best, growing dynamite bud...oh, wait, that's illegal....
here's a little reading for you, see anything skewed here? Like driving smashed is laughable among friends. Cultural issue on both sides of the border here...let's have a drink and talk about gun control.
Nothing worse than talking out of both side of ones mouth...
Gun control is like trying to eliminate drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to get cars.
The second Amendment is not negotiable!
If you don't think there there is a conspiracy to get rid of guns, why is it that Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Shumer, Micheal Bloomberg, and the like have been promoting gun control for years? Many of them have openly admitted their goal is to ban private ownership of all fire arms.
Did not every member of Congress, as well as the President & VP take an oath to protect & defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, both foreign & domestic? If trashing any part of the Bill of Rights fails to qualify as "domestic enemy" I don't know what does. They should all be hung for treason!
Blaming a gun for a shooting is like blaming a pencil for a misspelled word... balderdash! No one in their right mind condones the violent acts of the very relative few, any more than we condone shamelessly taking advantage of situations to promote an agenda.
First, liberal politicians like pelosi and shumer like to throw into the "innocent children" pot all the little gangbangers that get popped. Their stats extend the term "child" to age 26. For my money, they can cap each other all they want, and I don't give a shit! Second, gun violence needs to be addressed in a completely logical and intelligent manner, NOT with emotion. That gets us nowhere. Third, It's probably a stretch to grasp the vehemence of the debate given the cultural history of the British Commonwealth. The force behind this debate comes not from wanting to completely eliminate any child being killed, but rather the very real concern that politicians will eliminate private ownership of firearms. The 2nd amendment is about POLITICIAN control, as in pelosi control, or obama control. There are some politicians, including the above mentioned (if in doubt, just READ THEIR STATEMENTS over the years on this issue) who'd really like to feel safe while completely screwing over the American public). That's why this is so important an issue. Defense of one's life and property actually are secondary, but more frequently called into play.
Do I feel there's some sort of conspiracy to take firearms? Absolutely. Do I feel something needs to be done to reign in the kooks from getting guns? Hell yes! But I see truth in the NRA saying background checks are a joke-they ARE! Felons who try to buy guns need to be prosecuted and jailed, but so few of them actually are, background checks are useless for what they're designed to do. The NRA's position is that if you're gonna have them, put some teeth into them, follow through, and jail these guys! What's so fucking hard about this? We have all these stupid laws on the books, but allow them to be plea-bargained away. That needs to stop. Also quit pissing about worrying about "intent" with the exception of determining accident vs. "meant to do it". Accident then needs to revert to civil court, while the other results in immediate hanging if it's determined that you actually DID do it. No exceptions, no "mitigating circumstances", no bullshit. Just a short drop and a long stop. And no "20-year wait", either.
in the Newton case, come on; the mother knew this kid was screwed up; she allowed him access to the weapon, and everyone KNEW he was dangerous right from the start, but why isn't she getting raked over the coals for her inability to parent (other than the fact that he killed her, too)? You're required to have a license to drive a car, maybe you should be required to take a test, and demonstrate through a practical exam that you can handle a kid, too! Otherwise, you don't get to have one. Just sayin`!
Nope, this isn't a hardware issue, but a cultural one. And it won't be "fixed" by anything these incompetent politicians can come up with. Simply look at California, where my Anschutz 1847 Fortner Biathlon target rifle's a felony-easily detachable magazine, and (GASP!!) a pistol grip!!! These morons think it's an "assault" weapon. Nope, in order to even begin the discussion, we require hard facts on who's shot, with what, under what circumstances. Then we need to determine the why of this. Once these two things are in play, we can begin to work to solve the issue.
AS to the "why" part, over the weekend in our local papers, there was a letter to the editor from some guy who's in charge of a Yakima mental health "outreach" program decrying the possibility of the mentally unstable being labeled as such. He claims mental stability was an issue in only a handful of these incidents. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight... They ate too many twinkies. Maybe we need to reign these idiots in, first?