Gun Politics

[hepcat]

So I’m guessing you kneel during the anthem.

[LawBeefaroni]

I always find the argument "enforce the existing laws" ignores the weak laws that are on the books. They suck, which is why we keep having this conversation.

If we don't even enforce weak laws, why should we think we'll enforce tougher ones instead? Anyway, the point is to not let one or the other stop action. Enforce current laws, look at, propose, and pass new ones. Why is that mutually exclusive?

[YellowKing]

Enforce current laws, look at, propose, and pass new ones.

We can't propose and pass new ones because the NRA and the GOP beholden to it thwart even the slightest discussion of it. I'd agree with your approach if we were on a level playing field, but the sad fact is we're not. There's only one side in this discussion willing to play ball. Against, I might add, the wishes of many responsible gun owners who do support tougher legislation.

[Rip]

I always find the argument "enforce the existing laws" ignores the weak laws that are on the books. They suck, which is why we keep having this conversation.

Is preventing people from owning a gun who have been convicted of domestic violence a "weak" law?

The U.S. Air Force didn’t report Texas church shooter Devin Kelley’s domestic violence conviction to the FBI -- even though it was required by the Pentagon -- leaving the door open for Kelley to buy weapons, officials said on Monday.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/06/ai ... -guns.html

If that is the diligence we can expect from our government then best we don't waste our time.

[LawBeefaroni]

Enforce current laws, look at, propose, and pass new ones.

We can't propose and pass new ones because the NRA and the GOP beholden to it thwart even the slightest discussion of it. I'd agree with your approach if we were on a level playing field, but the sad fact is we're not. There's only one side in this discussion willing to play ball. Against, I might add, the wishes of many responsible gun owners who do support tougher legislation.

So what do we do? Wring our hands or get rid of those beholden to the NRA? I mean for all the outrage there's an awful lot of nothing being done.

[Blackhawk]

Al of this discussion is essentially rendered moot by the fact that it assumes the existence of a government capable of enacting meaningful change on controversial issues and keeping that change in place long enough to take effect. Without that, this all becomes hypothetical.

[GreenGoo]

Somehow the US went from approx. 3500 unfiltered cigarettes per adult aged 18 and above per year in 1950 to only 15% of adults smoking in 2015.

And that's with smoking remaining legal (i.e. no government banning) and the tobacco industry fighting against any reduction every step of the way.

Culture can change.

Good luck with that.

[Fretmute]

Somehow the US went from approx. 3500 unfiltered cigarettes per adult aged 18 and above per year in 1950 to only 15% of adults smoking in 2015.

And that's with smoking remaining legal (i.e. no government banning) and the tobacco industry fighting against any reduction every step of the way.

Culture can change.

Good luck with that.

My comic book self is working on gunpowder that causes cancer 50 years ago. I'll let you know how it goes.

[Isgrimnur]

But is he Comics Code compliant?

[YellowKing]

So what do we do? Wring our hands or get rid of those beholden to the NRA? I mean for all the outrage there's an awful lot of nothing being done.

The only thing we can do is keep voting in politicians who support responsible gun control. But we as Americans (in the broadest sense) are apparently OK with kids getting mowed down, as long as they're not our kids.

One good article I read pointed out that gun violence isn't going to be a public health issue until we all know someone who was killed in a random shooting.

[pr0ner]

Trump has weighed in.

President Trump said Tuesday that new gun laws would have made "no difference" in preventing the massacre at a church service in Sutherland Springs, Texas, that left 26 people dead.

...

"If you did what you're suggesting, there would have been no difference three days ago," Trump said, before turning to praise the actions of a bystander who engaged the shooter following his rampage. "You might not have had that very brave person who happened to have a gun or a rifle in his truck, go out and shoot him and hit him and neutralize him."

The president added, "I can only say this. If [the neighbor] didn't have a gun, instead of 26 dead, you would have had hundreds more dead. So that's the way I feel about it, not going to help."

In other words, move along, nothing's gonna happen, nothing to see here.

[Isgrimnur]

As expected.

[GreenGoo]

Hundreds more? The town only holds 300ish. Was he going to go house to house for the rest of the day?

I hate Drumpf so fucking much. He can't even make a salient point without being a caricature of a real human being.

[LawBeefaroni]

Well, the 1-issue voters must feel justified now.

Does he have any remarks about the failure the [his] government prohibit this prohibited person?

[Isgrimnur]

He hasn't found the right general to blame.

[Smoove_B]

In other words, move along, nothing's gonna happen, nothing to see here.

No, I think you're doing a discredit to the deeper message here. As usual, the solution to the gun problem is more guns - so that everyone has the ability to stop the next mass-casualty shooter while simultaneously potentially being the next mass-casualty shooter. USA! USA!

EDIT: It won't surprise me at all if he gives the Presidential Medal of Freedom to the two civilians that exchanged gunfire with the killer.

[Isgrimnur]

Independent

Donald Trump reportedly told the Emperor of Japan that mass shootings can occur "anywhere", despite the country having some of the world's most stringent gun control policies.
...
But in Japan, gun deaths are measured in single figures annually, compared to tens of thousands in the US.

Handguns are banned and anyone seeking a licence for a shotgun or air rifle must undergo a string of background checks, a written test and health evaluations.

Even police rarely use their sidearms and must attain a black belt in judo or other Japanese martial art before qualifying.

[Rip]

Independent

Donald Trump reportedly told the Emperor of Japan that mass shootings can occur "anywhere", despite the country having some of the world's most stringent gun control policies.
...
But in Japan, gun deaths are measured in single figures annually, compared to tens of thousands in the US.

Handguns are banned and anyone seeking a licence for a shotgun or air rifle must undergo a string of background checks, a written test and health evaluations.

Even police rarely use their sidearms and must attain a black belt in judo or other Japanese martial art before qualifying.

Many of the gun deaths you refer to are suicide deaths. Guess what Japan still has a crazy levels of even without guns? Suicide.

[Isgrimnur]

I know you like it in left field, but come on.

[Rip]

In the end it is either about saving lives or it isn't.

People jumping off bridges or in front of trains isn't any less of an issue than shooting yourself.

If it isn't about suicides and we are only concerned with people taking the lives of others then please stop using suicides to fluff the gun violence statistics to further the political agenda of restricting guns. You could magically remove all the guns from the US and it wouldn't even put a noticeable dent in suicides which as I said is a majority of the oft quoted gun death numbers.

What gun control proponents fail to realize is that when you do this you doom just about any legislation you do manage to get passed to failure because when it is obvious that the gun death numbers fail to go down much if at all, the measures will be judged as failures.

[pr0ner]

Talk about missing the point entirely.

[Isgrimnur]

[malchior]

Talk about missing the point entirely.

Like many conservatives nowadays it is all about fitting data to belief. For example, the Swiss have high levels of gun ownership but tightly regulated and man oh man believe it or not they have less mass shootings. *BUT* they still tend to have more gun deaths because availability of guns is highly correlated with violence (suicide included).

It is almost like if you make violence easier to commit in a flash with highly available tools there might be more violence. Crazy thoughts. But the ship has sailed because in whole our society is sociopathic across the board. This is just one of the most obvious areas...well and Trump. Like many have intimated this debate was over after Sandy Hook. That was the moment to decide we weren't monsters collectively and we failed miserably.

[GreenGoo]

My comic book self is working on gunpowder that causes cancer 50 years ago. I'll let you know how it goes.

It already puts random holes in the body with no warning. Smoking takes years to kill anyone. Gunpowder is instant.

It should be a no-brainer.

[noxiousdog]

What gun control proponents fail to realize is that when you do this you doom just about any legislation you do manage to get passed to failure because when it is obvious that the gun death numbers fail to go down much if at all, the measures will be judged as failures.

Clearly we need extreme vetting.

[em2nought]

So I’m guessing you kneel during the anthem.

I don't really like it, but I don't watch the NFL so I don't really have a dog in that fight. If the NFL wants to reduce it's influence on society that's fine by me. Sports gets far too much taxpayer money. Something about "Give the mob what they want" Smoke and mirrors, eh?

Gun advocates are going to fight all the way because they know if you gradually chip away at gun ownership eventually you'll knock their numbers down to where confiscation will happen. ...and let's face it that's the first goal of any wanna be socialist society.

[pr0ner]

Gun advocates are going to fight all the way because they know if you gradually chip away at gun ownership eventually you'll knock their numbers down to where confiscation will happen. ...and let's face it that's the first goal of any wanna be socialist society.

Lolwut?

[Kraken]

In the silver lining department, the NRA's agenda has stalled since Trump signed onto it. (They paid $30M to flip him).

The NRA’s top agenda item is to pass a federal law that would allow a gun owner with a permit to carry a concealed weapon in one state to conceal that weapon in any other state that issues such permits, which is virtually every state in the country. Opponents say that would usurp state officials’ authority to regulate those deemed too dangerous to carry a concealed gun in their state.

Despite Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress and more than 200 co-sponsors on the main bill for the measure, called “concealed carry reciprocity,’’ there have been no hearings held on the bill, and it seems to be stalled.

“The weaker the White House becomes, the more difficult it is to have those hearings,” said Richard Feldman, a former NRA lobbyist and founder of the pro-gun group Independent Firearm Owners.

There are some benefits to having the weakest and least popular president in, well, ever.

[hepcat]

So I’m guessing you kneel during the anthem.

I don't really like it, but I don't watch the NFL so I don't really have a dog in that fight. If the NFL wants to reduce it's influence on society that's fine by me. Sports gets far too much taxpayer money. Something about "Give the mob what they want" Smoke and mirrors, eh?

Gun advocates are going to fight all the way because they know if you gradually chip away at gun ownership eventually you'll knock their numbers down to where confiscation will happen. ...and let's face it that's the first goal of any wanna be socialist society.

I love the mindset of folks like you. Kneeling during the national anthem is disrespectful to the men and women who have served in the military, but don't take our guns because we don't trust the military.

[YellowKing]

If you really want to get your blood boiling, go read about how the shooter hunted down and targeted crying babies. I wish every GOP politician who's in bed with the NRA had to sit down and watch a video of that, then explain to the family how they're powerless to do anything to prevent it.

[Default]

Thanks for being a quitter who shows how to helplessly give up in the face of common sense.

I always find the argument "enforce the existing laws" ignores the weak laws that are on the books. They suck, which is why we keep having this conversation.

Is preventing people from owning a gun who have been convicted of domestic violence a "weak" law?

The U.S. Air Force didn’t report Texas church shooter Devin Kelley’s domestic violence conviction to the FBI -- even though it was required by the Pentagon -- leaving the door open for Kelley to buy weapons, officials said on Monday.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/06/ai ... -guns.html

If that is the diligence we can expect from our government then best we don't waste our time.

[Smoove_B]

If you really want to get your blood boiling, go read about how the shooter hunted down and targeted crying babies.

Hadn't seen this reported anywhere, so I'll need to take your word for it. I'd thought Sandy Hook was horrific (and it was), but this would be a whole new level of evil - more so that I would have thought possible. Again, if we don't collectively hear this (assuming it's true) and decide it's too much of a price to pay for unfettered access to firearms, then honestly - it'll never, ever happen.

[GreenGoo]

If you really want to get your blood boiling, go read about how the shooter hunted down and targeted crying babies.

Hadn't seen this reported anywhere, so I'll need to take your word for it.

This has click bait written all over it. My first thought is deep skepticism. If it turns out to be true, well then it's a new low, even for mass murderers.

[LawBeefaroni]

If those babies had been armed, maybe this wouldn't have happened.

[Max Peck]

If you really want to get your blood boiling, go read about how the shooter hunted down and targeted crying babies.

Hadn't seen this reported anywhere, so I'll need to take your word for it.

This has click bait written all over it. My first thought is deep skepticism. If it turns out to be true, well then it's a new low, even for mass murderers.

The BBC is reporting it as fact, based on at least one survivor interview.

Survivors have been describing how Kelley went pew to pew in the church shooting crying children.

In an interview with San Antonio television station KSAT, Rosanne Solis described the terror among congregants.

In Spanish, Ramirez explained that the gunman started with the crew in charge of the camera and audio area.

He then moved into the center aisle, toward those at the front of the stage with the music crew. Aisle by aisle, he continued to shoot. He would open fire point-blank on babies who cried.

Solis said she thinks there were about 25 children inside the church at the time of the shooting.

Ramirez said he remembered making eye contact with the pastor’s 14-year-old daughter, who was crying out for help. He signaled with his finger for her to be quiet, because the gunman sought anyone who made a sound and killed them.

[hepcat]

Christ. I hate to be this way, but I honestly hope that bastard suffered and died painfully.

[Isgrimnur]

He took the coward’s way out and shot himself.

[Paingod]

A thought generated on the drive in to work today...

If the NRA's entire platform is "No" to every gun control bill and the simplicity of the platform is their power, how hard would it be to form an anti-NRA lobby group that has decided "Yes" to every gun control measure is reasonable. There should be enough people who believe in that to band together and have some impact. Does this group already exist?

[hepcat]

He took the coward’s way out and shot himself.

After taking two bullets at the church while exchanging gunfire with the neighbor.

[LawBeefaroni]

A thought generated on the drive in to work today...

If the NRA's entire platform is "No" to every gun control bill and the simplicity of the platform is their power, how hard would it be to form an anti-NRA lobby group that has decided "Yes" to every gun control measure is reasonable. There should be enough people who believe in that to band together and have some impact. Does this group already exist?

Kind of. But that strikes me as a bad thing. An unyielding, irrational "Yes" is just as bad as an unyielding, irrational "No."

I know division is all the rage these days but it doesn't result in meaningful, positive change.