Culture of Shootings , "Thoughts and Prayers" But No Solutions

The NRA is a festering sore of corruption on our body politic. They should be tried as a false non-profit and fined out of existence for tax evasion. Right now they are weak and this is the time to get them

 

These are all good questions, of course.

I would promote the idea of something like the NTSB, only for guns. The objective would be to study this problem as seriously as we study problems such as air travel, road safety, etc. I don't know what they would come up with, but I'm sure it will take a number of partial solutions. We have air bags and seat belts - good ideas that help, but don't solve the whole problem. This isn't a "one solution" kind of problem.

I would promote allowing states and cities to have more control over their approach to guns.

Having the same gun laws in Wyoming as we do in Washington, D.C. is just plain STUPID.

In one case, the prey is animals. In the other, it is humans. That's a pretty dang big difference, don't you think?

If a city wants to ban the crap out of guns, what is the excuse for preventing them from doing that?

 

Colorado requires a background checks on ALL purchases of guns, including private sales of firearms. Background checks are done by CBI, not FBI, but its an ATF form, 4473, that is used.

 

He always was a democrat.

 

Can I go to Colorado and buy a gun from someone without a 4473 or background check?

Is there a wait period long enought that the CBI actually does perform the background check? To date, many places have wait periods that are so short that the majority of sales don't actually get checked due to lack of manpower.

 

If the guy sympathised with ISIS he shouldn't have been able to buy a gun.

Why do gunnies think everyone should be able to have a gun. WTF. WHY is it so important to them? I've never had a gun and don't want one. My life is worth living even if I don't have a childish plaything.

This guy was looking for help. If he hadn't been able to buy a gun 10 people would be alive who are now dead and he would probably not be facing life in prison or worse. I guess he's really happy that we protected his 'rights' isn't he?

 

First of all, murder is not in our DNA. Second, the solution cannot come from attacking the rights of those who are no threat to anyone. You attack them, they defend their rights, and while good people fight among each other, killers enjoy an advantage.

What solution do you propose?

 

I have ideas... they tend to be rejected by many because they don't involve controlling people. For example- increasing access to mental health requires, in part, that we stop decentivizing people from seeking help by essentially threatening to limit their freedom if they're unlucky enough to be diagnosed with the 'wrong' illness. So long as this policy remains in effect, the mentally ill will avoid diagnosis (and thus avoid treatment) in attempt to avoid risking the loss of their freedoms, such as: access to their children, ability to hold certain jobs, right to own firearms, and even control over their own finances. Increasing funding to these programs is of course also necessary, but will never be beneficial so long as people avoid using these programs for the reasons previously listed. In this context, we're essentially causing mental illness to lead to violence by causing the mentally ill to avoid seeking treatment. Its... well, crazy.

 

You are referring to paranoia and distrust of science based medicine.

And, your suggestions do not even START to address that problem.

 

Auto safety affects everyone. Air traffic safety affects everyone. OSHA affects everyone.

Your idea that we can find the "bad guys" and just do something to THEM is about as silly as it could possibly be.

I think you're reading too much sci fi or something.

 

Evidently you've NEVER purchased a firearm, so let me walk you through it; any business that sells firearms MUST have a FFL, Federal Firearms License, a potential buyer must fill out a Firearms Transaction Record, ATF form 4473, which is then submitted to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, "instant" being relative, sometimes a few minutes, sometimes a few hours. in addition, many states have their own separate Criminal Background Check System form to be filed with their state police agency at the same time as Form 4473. To knowingly lie on either form is a felony punishable by imprisonment and fines. When the background checks clear the buyer pays his money and takes possession of the firearm, if the background checks come back denied, he walks out empty handed. Also some states have a "waiting period", where the buyer, having passed the background check must wait the proscribed period of time before taking possession of the firearm. If the dealer in Colorado complied with all applicable Federal and Colorado firearms transaction laws then they bear NO blame, simple as that.

 

Its not 'paranoid' or 'anti-science' to understand that certain diagnosis of mental illness can cause one to lose certain rights. Its reality, and its one that we could change if we wanted to.

 

Yep, even those who called themselves "law-abiding" will finally expose their criminal hearts.

 

What do I purpose?

 

I'm not talking about groups who want to take over America although I'm sure there are plenty. Rather I'm talking about folks who will fight if they have to to keep their right to own firearms.

 

Alzheimer's? Sorry to hear that.

 

So you want to shoot those who are willing to amend the Constitution, huh? What is the purpose of the Constitution in the first place? Something about Democracy?

 

That is exactly how the Nazis saw things.

 

What are you talking about? First "purpose" and now "Alzheimer's". Get a dictionary.

 

We don't have a gun problem.

We have rare examples of people with problems using guns.

 

My ancestors went to America 1640. One of mine was a Geist, a general with Washington.
Later we migrated to the South and lost half our male line to the Civil War.
Having said that ----- it is my opinion that had America remained in the British Commonwealth
then:
1 - America would have the same freedoms as Canada, Australia and New Zealand enjoy
2 - Slavery would have ended far earlier and there would be no Civil War.
3 - The two world wars might not have happened as Germany wouldn't face just Britain and
her weak Commonwealth members but America as well - from the get go (and not till both
wars had turned.)
4 - America might not have had such a strong gun culture (Australia had a stronger gun
culture but we changed in the 20th Century.)

 

I'm fully aware of that.

The point is that suggesting the Atlanta shooter had passed a background check is a total bit of nonsense.

As I'm sure you know, these background checks have time limits and the chance that any level of actual background checking always hapapens is pretty much ludicrous.

 

No, that isn't what you said. You claimed that people who are borderline would resist on the grounds of your logic, whereas if we give no restrictions for people with problems, then they might be willing to get help.

Those who have these problems including disrespect for medical science to the degree where restrictions might be called for aren't going to do that kind of analysis.

Besides, if restrictions are needed, they are needed!

Yes, we can change anything we want to. We don't have to live like this.

 

..,.

 

....