Preventing Massacres - the serious solutions thread.

Preventing US Massacres - the serious solutions thread.

What are your prescritions for preventing such terrible events? Serious ones only please.

Here are mine;

1/ Safety locks on all guns.

Thats it from me.

Tell me yours.

 

Here is mine.

Stop listening to a foreigner who does not know jack about America.

 

There is no way to prevent mass killings.

History shows us this.

 

Assuming we could stop them. Banning guns would surely prevent school shootings.

 

Better funding for mental health.

 

In the military, we don't say that we can't do a certain thing. What we do is seek to minimize/neutralize various negative aspects of a given scenario. We constantly work to make things safer, more secure and more efficient. We set GOALS to keep certain negative numbers DOWN.

Yes, it is often an uphill climb... but we make the effort and the results are most often positive.

For someone to just STOP at saying: "There is no way to prevent mass killings."... makes me wonder why they didn't go on to say what they thought might help reduce the numbers of the same.

We cannot prevent everything 'absolutely'... but we CAN indeed lower the probability of such being successfully carried out. To simply accept the status quo and imply there is 'nothing' we can do to make things better... is a problem in America.

We made automobiles 'better' and 'safer' (over many decades); why can't we put our minds to saving more lives where gun violence is concerned?

 

... how are safety locks going to prevent anything?

 

Just in case someone who is planning a robbery leaves their gun out. The person who took it won't use it to for a mass shooting...

 

common sense regulations on gunsales. Criminalize storage of firearms in homes occupied by the mentally unstable.

 

I've heard it suggested that most of these massacres could have been prevented by offering some kind of psychiatric assistance, since the people were usually clearly disturbed before they killed a bunch of people.

I don't mean to politicize it, but perhaps the availability of health care, including psychiatric assistance, might have been the best prevention?

 

How do you figure that?

There's over 200 million guns in circulation so do you really think they are all going to disappear?

Remember its the liberals who want to give amnesty because they say its impossible to deport 12 millio people. They want to legalize drugs becuase they say you cant stop the flow of drugs yet somehow they wont have a problem collecting 200 million weapons before more are used for mass shootings?

You guys just get dumber by the day.

 

They might prevent you from getting to your gun in a timely matter.

Whats that state that lets you carry an unloaded gun??? LOL whats the point?

 

Or require State inspections in such homes... to verify the weapons are stored properly.

 

Doesn't matter, flat out. Denying people access to them would reduce their numbers.

If noting else simply because they would not be produced on the scale they are today.

 

Might help in a few cases but it has to be voluntary. Its against a persons Constitutional rights to force them to undergo any type of treatment before any harm has occured. Do you really want mental health patrols rolling down your street just plucking people up because it looks like they may do something in the future?

 

Conceal carry.

 

That's really a waste of resources...

 

There's enough guns in the system already to provide firepower for the next 100 years. Most of these mass shootings have weapons that were attained illegally. Banning them is not going to do anything.

Hard drugs are illegal and they are very easy to get. Guns are even a bigger profit margin, especially if you ban them, you really think it will be hard to find one?

 

I think you are generally correct.

And if we lose more people, of the same type in the right situations and communities... I can see anti-manufacture gun laws sailing through various legislatures like greased-lighting.

 

I think that's why he said, "Assuming we could stop them." He's suggesting that if we could, hypothetically, successfully ban guns, that would prevent shootings. Is how I read it. And I think it's technically accurate. No guns, no shootings. But I agree with you that it's impractical to ban guns. I think it's also undesirable and unwise to ban all guns.

 

Blah blah blah, Drugs aren't guns. Guns are considerably harder to smuggle and manufacture.

Name one county that has banned guns that has high gun violence.

Just one.

Even if you can i'm sure I'll have a counter argument.

 

We can but I was only addressing the broad point of the OP. His question wasn't what we can do to limit them it was how do we prevent them. Two separate issues.

 

Columbia.

 

Many Americans can see that 100 years isn't too long to push for something worthwhile. I'm an African American, we know about LONG generational struggles as Americans.

If we can cut the deaths by 1/2 or 2/3 in 100 years... I'd say that the goal set was worthwhile. But this notion that we should do NOTHING and allow things to continue as they are... doesn't make much sense.

 

I don't disagree with you.