SERIOUS Compromise between Pro gun and gun control!

Absolutely true, it's a well known lie to blame the gun, not the person who pulled the trigger.

If their claim was true, then why don't people in this country blame Ford, Chevy or Dodge for causing the deaths of people killed by drunk drivers?

 

1) Guns must be kept out of the hands of children 9 and under, or be charged with voluntary manslaughter/attempted for any accidents committed by the child.

Who should be charged?
I was making zip guns at age 7 or 8 EDC’d a switchblade with a 5” blade without my parents knowledge. So, they should be charged for anything I did without their knowledge?

2) Comprehensive Mental Health Care reform with an emphasis on suicide prevention and increasing access and availability of support and counselling.
OK, but why is this associated with any compromise with gun legislation?

3) Create a State funded suicide prevention task force to have small groups of mental health professionals go around the state providing free counseling, mental health evaluations, and support.
And who is required to receive it?

4) Create education subsidies and grants for those pursuing careers in the mental health field that agree to spend a designated time after graduation working in rural communities. There are similar programs for medical doctors.
And do what?

5) Launch a comprehensive state study of common psychological drugs to determine potential risks for violent behavior associated with their use.
Has been done more than once.

6) Create a state program to temporarily surrender your firearms at any police station for 72 hours.
For what purpose?
BTW, something similar was done in Ireland in the 70’s under the provision of having guns forensically checked if they were used in the North for a crime. Most of the guns were not returned.

7) Implement a national counseling app produced by the Michigan Department of Education, for students K through 12 as well as College, that provides counseling resources including face to face tele-counseling to provide statewide counseling resources for all students.
From MICH, eh? Again, for what purpose beyond that already available through on site staff.

State Tax credits for gun safes and annual gun safety courses.
One of the few I’d agree with.

9) Real gun safety education elective courses in high school, like drivers ed.
Again, one of the few I’d agree with; particularly since many parents no longer assume this roll.


10) Create a state work program focused on rebuilding the crumbling infrastructure in America with a recruiting campaign targeting low income high crime areas.
Again, why associated with a gun compromise? It is something debated on its own merit.

11) State mandate all uniformed peace officers and agents to have an active body cam during working hours.
Many, if not most already do or are headed that way. Again, what has this to do with an gun legislation compromise?

12) Create a State task force to independently investigate all police shootings and determine their validity.
Again, what has this to do with an gun legislation compromise?

13) Enact and enforce mandatory minimums, 10 year per gun and 1 year per bullet, for all prohibited persons found guilty of committing a property or violent crime with an illegally possessed firearms unless they cooperate with investigators to identify and testify against who supplied them the illegal guns and ammunition.
I’d agree with this, but already shot down by the SCOTUS

14) Create a multi agency task force to target known gang members for tax evasion through the State revenue service.
Again, what has this to do with an gun legislation compromise? Also, existing RICO law covers this.

 

No the bill of rights were specifically meant to apply against the federal government as stated in the preamble of the bill of rights.

"Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.

The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution expressed a desire in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several states as Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution. viz.

Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress and Ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution."

 

The parents are charged regardless of what they knew or when they knew it if something goes wrong. 3rd degree homicide or attempted.

Because it is tied to preventing gun suicides by those who are mentally ill or struggling mentally.

Those who have been admitted into a mental facility or made suicidal statements in the past or current.

Increase the number of mental health professionals.

I know but once the state independently verifies which drugs cause violence they can be added to the list of things that suspend a person for 1 year from owning or using a gun after the taking of such medicine.

The purpose would be to get guns out of the hands of those who are mentally ill while they recover. Although the police would have the decision to decide if they believe the individual is sane enough to return the weapon.

So they have an on demand consler basically make access easier and more avaliable.

Because it is tired to guns to reduce gun homicides and armed crimes by reducing rates of poverty

Police are more likely to shoot people with guns so it protects gun owners.

Same reason to protect gun owners.

 

So because your proposal is tired about guns, we must all sleep our Second Amendment rights away?

<Rule 2>

 

Maybe I'm old and need glasses. Please post this again and highlight in red only the part that says that the Bill of Rights was specifically meant to apply only against the Federal Government.

 

The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution expressed a desire in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

 

Hmmm. You must have learned reading using common core where a thing says whatever you want it to say. Nothing in the bold (I guess red was too difficult for you) says anything about directing the Bill of Rights toward the Federal Government...

 

I am thinking you made more sense of his post than I could. Seem a nonsensical mix of words to me, kind of like dictionary roulette.

 

It does amaze me how many here, seemingly on both sides of the proverbial aisle, read into the Constitution, supporting historical documents, court rulings, or the law, words or meaning that just plainly are not there.

 

It literally says that they were adding more restrictive measures to the central government.

You are using 21 century ideals of America and putting those beliefs on 18th century documents. No one saw themselves as "American" back then they saw themselves as, Citizens of their state. There for when they added the bill of rights they wanted to make clear that the federal government could not encroach on the states or the people in said ways.

 

No, it literally doesn't use the word central.

 

well what did the new constitution create? the ****ing federal/central government. The states existed prior to the constitution so clearly it's not talking about them. Seriously your ability to use logic to figure out what they were talking about is much lacking.

"The creation of this building having 4 walls a ceiling and a floor all the same size" It could be talking about a circle since it never said a cube.

You seem to have supreme-Court-Idis which makes you misinterpret clear and obvious text as opposite to the intent.

 

No, the problem is you are misinterpreting the document, to make it fit your anti-gun narrative.

 

Or, those that string together words that ultimately convey nonsense.

 

Fluck it!

Not gonna hold back, put the AWB, Requirement to unload guns before traveling and raised the age to own/use a gun without adult supervision to 18 or graduated high school.

 

You cannot demonstrate the necessity for, or the efficacy of, these limitations on the right to keep and bear arms.

 

Thus confirming this entire thread of discussion was predicated on a deliberate lie. Thus demonstrating a complete absence of legitimacy on the part of yourself.

 

AWB and age restriction to prevent school shootings.
AWB to prevent mass shootings
Safe travel to prevent guns being used in road rage incidents. I have the PERFECT example of why we need that!

Crazy dad with kids in back chases down truck rams truck, and shoots at truck near homes!

 

No I was completely planning on trying to hold this compromise, my mom convinced me otherwise. Mothers know best

 

You cannot demonstrate these limitations on the right to keep and bear arms are necessary to, and effective in, achieve these effects.

 

You offered no compromise, just a lesser demand of acquiescence.

 

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/murder-rate-by-state/

The states that have strict gun control with the exceptions of MD and IL due to Baltimore and Chicago and the courts striking bans down have lower murder rates than those who are totally gun open.

 

Demonstrate how such would ultimately serve to accomplish any of the presented claims. Not merely how such may work in theory within the confines of a sterile setting, absent outside influences, but rather how it will actually work within the confines of the real world where respect for rule of law is at an all-time low, and there is no way of physically preventing an individual from committing a crime simply because they want to.

 

If firearm-related restrictions truly worked in a consistent, universal manner, there would be no reason to exclude the states of Maryland and Illinois, as there would be no states where the statewide restrictions have failed. But such is obviously not the case. Meaning firearm-related restrictions do not actually work by default.