An interesting article that goes right to the heart of the gun ban problem. I'm just sick of these people lying to us. http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/23...playing-different-game/#.WU0c9Eiwm2I.facebook
This is nothing new. The goal IS the total banning and confiscation of firearms. Anything else is a total lie. The dustup is coming.
Its on. Too many people making Guns and ammo right now. If Gun manufacture were halted, you could not stop the countless home made Guns that would replace commercial Guns.
There are two kinds of anti-gun people: -Those who want the state to have a monopoly on force -The useful idiots working for the previous group.
In NI in the late 60's and 70's home made, more specifically, independent machine shop produced, gun were made that included everything from single shot gun, to Sten replicas, to very large mortars, not to mention bombs of alll sizes. However, in this country, guns will simply follow the path of drugs if profits are to be made.
I agree with you. OTOH, the gun owners could become activists and lobby for legislation that would impact gun violence without attacking firearms and gun owners. We don't and, as a result, have to be confronted by political propaganda prostitutes whose ONLY use for statistics is to get what they want. Personally, I do not understand why we don't unite by lobbying for counter-measures.
I think we are lobbying for counter measures! CCW and Constitution Carry laws, Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground. In the end, we need to go back to a proper Constitutional interpretation of the 2nd Amendment as public policy, and then address the REAL contributors to crime, such as ineffective mental health law, excessively lenient sentencing for violent crime, and to eliminate incarceration for nonviolent offenses.
Gun owners are trying to lobby for better carry laws, but that does not reduce crime. I'm not sure what you mean about ineffective mental health laws (unless you're advocating giving mental health officials more control over people or increasing the amount of information available to the government - in which case I would oppose you.) I'm for prison reform, but for effective prison reform. With reducing gun violence and the mental health community, we know that over 98 percent of mass murders are committed by people under the control / care of a psychiatrist, psychologist and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs OR they are political jihadists. With SSRIs, all one has to do is tell their doctor or mental health official they are depressed, anxious, have thoughts of hurting and / or killing themselves or others and they get an automatic prescription for SSRIs. KNOWN SIDE EFFECTS: Homicidal and suicidal tendencies. SSRIs should not be the first line of treatment. They should be the last. Treatment should begin with group therapy and one on one therapy. That would discourage the younger people from using the medical community for feel good drugs. And, IF, SSRIs become the treatment, it should be done in a controlled environment. THAT would reduce gun violence. Serious prison reform that requires inmates to get a GED, at a minimum, in order to qualify for early release is a start. Inmates should be required to get job skills, take seminars in balancing a checkbook, planning a budget, interviewing for a job / job hunting skills, obtaining credit, understanding how to buy a house, car, and insurance should be required as well. Then when you reintroduce them to society, they come back with all their Rights intact. THAT is where we should be expending our efforts.
I can honestly say I agree with pretty much everything you mention above. I do think that there needs to be a venue for those with documentably extreme mental health issues to face intervention; such as with the guy who shot Gabrielle Giffords, who was clearly in the grip of extreme mental illness before he ever committed his heinous acts, but no one acted to get him committed even after it became clear he was on the verge of a violent explosion. Otherwise, I think you're completely right with the other issues you mention.
Eliminate the use of the nomenclature "Gun Violence" there is no such thing. It is Violence, a Criminal act. To implicate or tie Guns to violence or acts of violence ie violent acts implies or indicates that Guns are a cause of violence and violent acts and part of a criminals nature. Is there knife violence ? Bat violence, Brick violence ?
Well, we're still in agreement. Any time that you have two or more neutral parties that can quantify / qualify some abnormal behavior, then it is time for an intervention. You can't just say a person "acts strangely," you have to be able to articulate the abnormality - the person threatens others, is generally verbal abusive or confrontational, and / or they make a lot of bizarre statements that would lead a normal person to be fearful. In any event, we have to do more than agree. If you and come up with an idea and others are willing to join the effort, realistic legislation could be drafted for consideration. Then, every time the left wants gun control, put the proposals before them. They will magically shut up. The left doesn't want interference and / or control in their lives any more than anyone else.