Gun control strategy that satisfies both sides

Translation:
You cannot meet the challenge put to you w/o dismantling your position.

 

Yep, there's that echo again

 

Gee, dont you ever sleep? You must be obsessed with your demands.

 

Let us know when you think you can step to the plate.

 

It's OK - if I were you I'd be embarrassed of my inability to carry my point as well.

 

Sounds reasonable to me. Good comment Rich.

 

While the original frame work was laid 227 years ago, the Constitution has the provisions included for its amendment and Americans have amended it many times over the last 227 years. To say it’s out of date is to ignore that fact and wrong.

 

Ignore time TOG.

 

I accept yourt concession.

 

That is a violation of forum rules....or so I have been told

 

Why would you believe that? You don't believe anything you have been told in the Political Forum.

 

I believe we both share that skepticism rich. Lol

 

Well there's been another shooting this time in Illinois. Trump avoided "thoughts and prayers" but did send condolences which will help stop the next mass murder. The public will feel safer now.....

 

Illinois’ red flag law went into effect on January 1, 2019. They also have a 72-hour waiting period for gun purchases, licensing for gun owners, and universal background checks. None of the gun control prevented Martin from entering Henry Pratt Company and opening fire.

 

And now the anti's will march out the same old, same old, demanding even more laws, regulations and bans to prevent the next tragedy, while ignoring the true problem, the person who pulled the trigger.

 

And your remedy to the "person who pulled the trigger"

 

There is a major thing wrong then. And I mean major.

 

He was a convicted felon. The state of Illinois found this out after they let him buy a gun when he tried to get a concealed weapons permit. In 2014, about five years ago.

The state of Illinois knew he had likely had purchased a gun as a felon, yet never felt the need in five years to do any further investigation. He could have been in prison right now if the state had done its job.

 

Prosecution and long term incarceration or the death sentence of those who did, allowing mental health records to be entered into the NICS, actually going after and arresting those who falsify 4473's and are rejected by NICS, providing BATF the funding to investigate such crimes.

Blaming firearms for mass killings and demanding more firearm related laws is ignoring the true problem, and until the anti's pull their heads out of the sand and drop their incorrect narrative, they are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

If they would work with those who are pro-firearms and demand the solutions I mentioned, this problem could be solved and lives saved, however as long as they continue to blame the tool, not the criminal, they are actually part of the problem, and have the blood of the dead on their hands.

 

You are correct, there is something major wrong. As I have mentioned in other posts, we have laws that are not working. Not because they are necessarily wrong or bad but because they are not being properly and adequately enforced or applied. This is not a gun problem problem it is a government/law enforcement/criminal problem.

 

Something that once again will be ignored by the anti's, while they continue to demand more firearm laws and regulations.

 

As the topic suggests "Gun control strategy that satisfies both sides" I don't mind admitting that the nature of the inground country gun environment is such that I think you are mostly correct. One cannot live abroad of USA and judge too much about your country without having lived there for a long time. People can judge others like me simply on the basis of the deplorable slaughter that in ongoing.

However some anti gun attitudes are also to be considered. The abolishment of some firearms that would not impact on hunting nor personal protection needs thought. If "Gun control strategy that satisfies both sides" there has to be concession on both sides. Nye impossible I believe for the US.

 

Yeh Rich, I agree. However, laws of all types are rarely enforced if Oz is like the US. Helmet wearing for cyclists as one minor example (to lower head injuries) was introduced here a few decades ago. Now the only time it is enforced is when a cop wants to question the rider over some other matter and uses the helmet law as a reason to pull him/her over.
On that principle the US can have all the laws enforced there will still be firearms out there unless like Oz they have a buy back scheme. In this picture as emotive as it is there has to be an impact on the injuries/murders with such removal from society. So why not implement that ? Unlike Oz the US doesn't have to include all guns, only some types.

 

The abolishment of some firearms would produce a zero change in the problem, banning certain firearms would do nothing to lower shootings, other than give the anti's something they could cheer about.

Until the next shooting.

The problem is, it's not the tool, it's the criminal who misuses the tool.

Until the anti's understand and address that problem, the carnage will never stop.

 

No concession is possible, because it solves nothing.