Gun Control Debate #1

[EuTuCroquet?]

Here’s what we, as Americans, agree on. The vast majority of Americans are NOT for banning all guns.

97 percent (given the margin of error, that’s pretty much everyone in America) is for universal background checks, for example.

Research poll:

U.S. Support For Gun Control Tops 2-1, Highest Ever, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds

“Support for universal background checks is itself almost universal, 97 - 2 percent, including 97 - 3 percent among gun owners. Support for gun control on other questions is at its highest level since the Quinnipiac University Poll began focusing on this issue in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre:

* 67 - 29 percent for a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons;

* 83 - 14 percent for a mandatory waiting period for all gun purchases.

* It is too easy to buy a gun in the U.S. today, American voters say 67 - 3 percent.

* If more people carried guns, the U.S. would be less safe, voters say 59 - 33 percent.

* Congress needs to do more to reduce gun violence, voters say 75 - 17 percent.”

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2521

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

And a pile of heroin or meth is not problem either. Just some chemicals. No big del.

Just ignore it; it might go away.

/s

❤️

 

[MaryG12]

However, many people can’t stand the thought of being a victim in any way (I fall into this category) and I won’t delude myself that my little slingshot will protect me in suburbia when MS-13 comes out of their neighboring inner city to do their nefarious acts in my sleepy neighborhood.

BBM

RSBM

I, too, am a member of that school of thought.

I am sure there are a lot of people including myself who also think, well, if the US government gets any more involved with gun control - aside of what laws already exist - they can and will screw it up. Unfortunately that's just how it is, every time the federal government gets involved with something, they totally screw it up. Doesn't matter what it is.

 

[kimlynn]

Live updates from CNN town hall.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/02/21/us/florida-school-shooting-town-hall-latest/index.html

Rubio wouldn't say that he won't accept money from the NRA. Dam" him..
He did say he would reconsider the issue of high capacity magazine so there is that.
Also have to give him credit for at least showing up.

 

[gitana1]

BBM

RSBM

I, too, am a member of that school of thought.

I am sure there are a lot of people including myself who also think, well, if the US government gets any more involved with gun control - aside of what laws already exist - they can and will screw it up. Unfortunately that's just how it is, every time the federal government gets involved with something, they totally screw it up. Doesn't matter what it is.

Federal court system, US mail, US military branches, US Space program, federal safety regulations, etc., etc. All of that is screwed up?

 

[gitana1]

Here’s what we, as Americans, agree on. The vast majority of Americans are NOT for banning all guns.

97 percent (given the margin of error, that’s pretty much everyone in America) is for universal background checks, for example.

Research poll:

U.S. Support For Gun Control Tops 2-1, Highest Ever, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds

“Support for universal background checks is itself almost universal, 97 - 2 percent, including 97 - 3 percent among gun owners. Support for gun control on other questions is at its highest level since the Quinnipiac University Poll began focusing on this issue in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre:

* 67 - 29 percent for a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons;

* 83 - 14 percent for a mandatory waiting period for all gun purchases.

* It is too easy to buy a gun in the U.S. today, American voters say 67 - 3 percent.

* If more people carried guns, the U.S. would be less safe, voters say 59 - 33 percent.

* Congress needs to do more to reduce gun violence, voters say 75 - 17 percent.”

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2521

Yup. So why are we debating so hard? It seems like a fringe few want to ban every gun or want to block any regulation. The rest of us want common-sense regulation.

I kind of feel that the NRA has successfully pitted otherwise reasonable people against each other in a phony fight, making a safety issue into a hard-line ideological one, even though most of us from any party want the same things. But if we keep fighting nothing will get done. Ever.

 

[jillycat]

I think it's when the federal government gets into the individual's business, the word definition business, or the knee-jerking to public pressure business that we get into trouble.

 

[Doghairrules]

Rubio wouldn't say that he won't accept money from the NRA. Dam" him..
He did say he would reconsider the issue of high capacity magazine so there is that.
Also have to give him credit for at least showing up.

I saw that. But like you said, at least he’s there and willing to have a conversation. That’s more than we’ve gotten before.

These kids are awesome!

 

[jillycat]

I saw that. But like you said, at least he’s there and willing to have a conversation. That’s more than we’ve gotten before.

These kids are awesome!

Actually, these kids are shouting down answers they don't like because they're unwilling to have a conversation.

 

[CARIIS]

The cop is doing it he is referring to Baker Act as treatment it is NOT treatment it is very very temporary CONFINEMENT

 

[gitana1]

Yes, exactly, this is why doing background checks harder will not stop shootings. These people are passing background checks.

However, I believe that bumping into someone else's boundary, in this case another law, changes nothing about the nature of a predator who doesn't care about boundaries between him or her and others in the first place. So if school shooter type hunters of innocent people can't be shooters, they may/will simply decide to be school bombers, or whatever achieves their goal of ending other people's lives.

I'm not saying we don't need to review current laws and regulations, or that there aren't additional regulations that may be useful. But I think trying make enough laws to stop violent people from being violent is distracting from the fact that soft targets are preferred targets for a reason, and there a lot of ways to kill in those environments.

Gun control research shows that in states where background checks are mandatory no matter what - no loopholes, the rates of suicides, LE being killed and women being killed by parents, is vastly lower. God only knows how many mass murders might have been prevented by a psycho who couldn't easily get a gun.

Yes, most of the mass shooters could have passed background checks. But their lack of a criminal record may show that they might not so easily think of illegal ways to acquire a gun.

As to crazy monsters finding a way to kill loads of people even if they have no access to guns? I did some research.

In Australia, from 1971 through 1996 (26 years), before the gun laws were changed, there were 137 mass murders. 122 were via gun, or 89%.

After 1996, from 1997 through the present (21 years), there were 81 mass murders, with only 18 via gun or 22%.

That shows a couple things. One, yes, mass murders happened and the mass murders from methods other than guns rose dramatically (arson was a big one).

However, using my sad math skills, if we divide the numbers of mass murder victims by years, the rates of mass murders have seemed to fall. 137 murders in the 26 year period prior to gun control, or 5.2 per year on average, as opposed to 81 murders in the 21 year period after gun control, or 3.8 per year on average.

So it appears that there are less victims in mass murder events after gun regulation. Meaning, yes, massacres will still occur but it is harder to get as many victims without certain weapons.

And the rate of mass murder events in general, not counting actual victim numbers, but just events, has appeared to decline a bit as well, with an average of 1.6 per year occurring prior to gun control as opposed to 1.5 after.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia#cite_note-7

 

[gitana1]

Actually, these kids are shouting down answers they don't like because they're unwilling to have a conversation.

Yeah it seems these kids are tired of being hunted while at school. They want action, not talk. I don't blame them.

 

[rsd1200]

BBM

RSBM

I, too, am a member of that school of thought.

I am sure there are a lot of people including myself who also think, well, if the US government gets any more involved with gun control - aside of what laws already exist - they can and will screw it up. Unfortunately that's just how it is, every time the federal government gets involved with something, they totally screw it up. Doesn't matter what it is.

Something needs to happen, but, call me paranoid, I'm not comfy w/the govt. in my business. They're probably reading this right now.

 

[bobcat]

Yup. So why are we debating so hard? It seems like a fringe few want to ban every gun or want to block any regulation. The rest of us want common-sense regulation.

I kind of feel that the NRA has successfully pitted otherwise reasonable people against each other in a phony fight, making a safety issue into a hard-line ideological one, even though most of us from any party want the same things. But if we keep fighting nothing will get done. Ever.

I think the big issue comes when they try to define what an "assault weapon" is. Sure, lots of people can agree on the idea of banning assault weapons. But what exactly is an assault weapon? I don't own any AR-15's or anything like that, but in my safe I do have a couple of 22 caliber semi-automatic rifles which can take 25, 50, or even 100 round detachable magazines. I also have a semi-automatic 30/06 deer rifle that was my dad's, which could probably somehow be modified to hold a higher number of cartridges than the 5-shot detachable magazine that is standard. Will these rifles fall under the assault rifle definition if "assault rifles" are banned?

 

[rsd1200]

Rubio wouldn't say that he won't accept money from the NRA. Dam" him..
He did say he would reconsider the issue of high capacity magazine so there is that.
Also have to give him credit for at least showing up.

Not his biggest fan but I gotta give him credit for being there!

 

[rsd1200]

Yup. So why are we debating so hard? It seems like a fringe few want to ban every gun or want to block any regulation. The rest of us want common-sense regulation.

I kind of feel that the NRA has successfully pitted otherwise reasonable people against each other in a phony fight, making a safety issue into a hard-line ideological one, even though most of us from any party want the same things. But if we keep fighting nothing will get done. Ever.

Yes. I'm not a member, but my father used to be. My father used to be an avid hunter and fisherman. He gave up his membership. He said it wasn't the same organization anymore and that was years ago.

 

[rsd1200]

Actually, these kids are shouting down answers they don't like because they're unwilling to have a conversation.

Ya know, I'm giving them a pass. I've never been hunted down, by a crazy person, with an AR.

 

[rsd1200]

The cop is doing it he is referring to Baker Act as treatment it is NOT treatment it is very very temporary CONFINEMENT

I think he's wanting it expanded and the person's firearms removed, and their name put in the database to flag them from buying.

 

[jillycat]

Yeah it seems these kids are tired of being hunted while at school. They want action, not talk. I don't blame them.

It seems there was a joke at the school that if there was ever a shooting it would be committed by the person that just committed it. It was funny and they were just children then. It's a an angry screaming match now and they are activists.

I think if they want to ask questions, they need to listen to the answer. As one of them had to yell at other students, "If I can't hear her, I can't come up with a rebuttal.' Never mind that deciding to rebut something you've not yet heard is not an honest inquiry, you can't scream and sneer your way to reform.

This was a political rally, not a discussion.

 

[kimlynn]

Yeah it seems these kids are tired of being hunted while at school. They want action, not talk. I don't blame them.

Amazing kids. I wish I had half of their resolve and engagement when I was their age. Just watched them perform a song called Shine (CNN)