If gun violence was an illness we'd do something about it.

I have seen several FB posts today which suggest exactly this title.

If 8 people per day were dying of some spurious illness Government would do something about it. Why can't we do something about this eoidemic of mass shootings that seem to be happening.

I am not an OBAMA fan, but he is right about guns andt Heir proliferation, IMO.

What would you request the government do. It is the remit of the President to protect the people of America, but we seem to tie his hands when it comes to gun violence.

 

But it's not an illness. Plus, it's not really politically correct to address the real cause of most of it.

 

If it were an illness, the government would do nothing until they had a tested and proven medication to treat it.
So far, there has been nothing proposed that would have prevented this and other mass shootings.
Liberals want to do "something" weather it works or not, and we all know there is nothing proposed that would stop mass shootings.
If we pass " something" just to say we did " something", libs will say we didn't go far enough when more mass shootings occur. There is your slippery slope.

 

the "illness" is only in the mind of the criminals when they commit the violence. wether its with a gun,bomb,knife,club,bat,fist,rope.... you name it and I bet its been used.

A firearm is just a another object. Its ment for PROTECTION. Same as a bike helmet or football pads. It can help protect you from the violence comitted by those wishing to do harm to you. IF you see it as a tool for murder or other violent crimes then I suggest you never pick one up.

Guns are not the problem but CRIME is and un till we live in utopia where there is no reason to protect your self I suggest more decent people carry protection and for GOV/LE to go after the criminals and grab for the ILLEGAL guns.

 

Freedom is not an illness.

Mass shootings are encouraged by a lack of freedom. Violent people seek out soft targets. What percentage of mass shootings happen in "gun fee zones"?

Now, excuse me while I put my gun on my hip and take my family out for a steak dinner.

 

If auto accidents were an illness we'd do something about it.

 

Tell us how you would stop the hundreds of killings in places like Chicago and Baltimore? Each year, both cities have more murders than all the mass shootings in the US over the last 20 years combined.

Chicago has no gun stores. Most killings are narcotic gang related. So if the Chicago gangstas can get tons of illegal narcotics from South America into their hoods---then how much more simple would it be for them to bring in small items like guns from anywhere?

 

There's little that hasn't been said here.
What about that kid in Santa Barbara last year? He posted his plans on social media the day before, yet no-one interfered as he carried it through. Does our society intend to prevent these shootings, or are they cheering the whole thing on, so the anti-gun crowd can keep whining?
Why is it just fine to keep blasting drones in every direction, killing wedding parties, and all kinds of "wrong guys"? You'll hear the hawks claim that a greater good is being served. That's the same story in all warfare.
And maybe that's your answer. The American Revolution ended centuries ago, but the fight for our freedom goes on, in every moment, for as long as there are people who would seek to deprive us of our Constitutional Rights.
It isn't "sane gun laws" that we need. It's sane Governance. If our Gov. were to organize in such a way as to include The People in the fight against crime, We People would be far less suspicious of the Gov. Let's drop the BS.
Imagine that YOU, a responsible Citizen were to witness a street shooting. You whip out your phone, autodial to the local cops, and send them the video, live, as the bad guys drive off. Dispatch comes back and advises that you follow at a safe distance, while your phone continuously sends your GPS coordinates to them.
Soon, you see unmarked cars intercepting the bad guys.
That's just one example, but you get the idea.
That's exactly how this Country was intended to work, with EVERY Citizen participating in the process of making the whole thing work. With that idea, we need to rethink EVERYTHING.
What if the entire way we have come to run this Country is ill, and the time has come to do something about it?

 

You may well be right about the 'slippery slope'. Having said that, questioning your use of English. Its not my slipery slope, it maybe 'a slippery slope'.

But still we have to somehoe reduce the number of guns in circulation. But more importantly change the moral tone of the rhetoric to less need for guns and killing to a greater care fir your fellow man, whether he / she is known to you or not. We could start by eliminating the use of four letter words by actors on TV and improving their presentation to the public.

We have to start somewhere and the mass media woud be a good place to start.

 

You said,
You may well be right about the 'slippery slope'. Having said that, questioning your use of English. Its not my slipery slope, it maybe 'a slippery slope'.

You also wrote,
But still we have to somehoe reduce the number of guns in circulation.

I guess that my somehow is a little different from yours and it seems that maybe you shouldn't be questioning someone's spelling. It happens.

But here's a thought. Why don't Hollywood actors who believe in gun control not do action movies with guns? What a concept, considering the absolute hypocrisy on the left.

- - - Updated - - -

You said,
You may well be right about the 'slippery slope'. Having said that, questioning your use of English. Its not my slipery slope, it maybe 'a slippery slope'.

You also wrote,
But still we have to somehoe reduce the number of guns in circulation.

I guess that my somehow is a little different from yours and it seems that maybe you shouldn't be questioning someone's spelling. It happens.

But here's a thought. Why don't Hollywood actors who believe in gun control not do action movies with guns? What a concept, considering the absolute hypocrisy on the left.

 

The

Point taken on spelling etc. I never know these days whether its my finger typing issue. (most likely) or automatic spellchecking.

But I like your idea of the last sentence. Trouble is they like the rest of the population seem governed by their desire for income and wealth rather than really doing much themselves to support their stated ideals. But maybe there are one or two.

It would be very good if one or two of these high profile people stood out and made a public stand. Having said that, I am not holding my breath on this.

 

I am supportive for the strictest gun control laws ever imaginable.

 

We know, but it's your fantasy and we don't really care.

 

I agree. We should do something about it. First we find out a pattern between...not only mass shooters, but gang crime as well. What was the state of their spiritual self. Did they grow up in stable families or unstable families. What was their screen time and what were they watching. What was their family life.

Its not guns but what we are raising. Something is amiss. Here in oklahoma we had two brothers...a 19 year old and a 16 year old stab to death 5 family members ...including three children. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/brothers-recorded-murder-family-report-article-1.2334886

As long as we are blaming guns...we don't solve the problem which is something very unhealthy eeking into our society.

 

CKW

We re in total agreement about the problem of something evil eeking into society. I think it is a progressive misuse of the Constirution to allow people freedom to be irresponsible. The 1st and 2nd Amendments ade great as long as they are used responsibly. The free use of bad language and four letter words often left uncriticized because this would impinge on freedom of speech is, IMO,irresponsible use ofThe1st A. I could go on.

 

I think you're wrong Molly. The first amendment is on life support. You can lose your job, your livelihood and your reputation for violating the PC rules of ethics. We should be able to say anything to anybody as long as it doesn't entail threats or violence. Just look at this place. Say the wrong thing about a protected group and you're dinged.

 

The entire Constitution is on life support.
One huge thing that almost no-one understands is that the American Revolution was fought, and our CONUS implemented because it meant enough, at the time, to wage war over. Every amendment was written as an exception to the way things were under the English, and as a guaranty that those ways would not be returned to. We were at war then, to protect the rights that our CONUS enumerates, and we have been for every living moment of our Nation, ever since.
Anyone can look at the foreign wars we've been in for the last 15 years, and accept that a certain amount of "collateral damage" comes in gaining the greater good. It's harder to accept, but just as true that collateral damage comes in the fight to preserve what little remains of our Constitutional Rights, here at home. So many want to raise a hue and cry because our gun rights result in the misuse of guns. Meanwhile, every other amendment is under similar attack, every single second. The misuse of the laws and battles that result from all of that are wrongful imprisonment, or other wrongful punishment and infringement. Just as QLB pointed out, the PC police are very well funded, well armed, and have the backing of the current regime.
The struggle to remain as free as civilized people can be is the Battle of Evermore. We have already proven that any man who gives up his freedom in exchange for security shall have neither, and nor does he deserve them.

 

If gun-related violence was an illness (FYI, it's not), then President Obama's approach would be akin to using leeches or snake oil. He, and his zombie-like left-wing cohorts, are advocating for something that has failed in theory and in practice and has no evidence to support it (e.g. gun control via the Manchin-Toomey Bill).

 

That's not true at all. Barring donations to non-profit research organizations, the only way gun violence would get a cure if it was a disease is if there was money in it for the pharmaceutical companies to cure it instead of "treat it".

 

That's what freedom of speech is though. The government is not the one doing the dinging, that's other people using their freedom of speech. The 1st amendment protects you from the government trying to silence you, not other citizens using their speech to boycott you.

 

Well I am not. I don't even think that would solve the endemic problem of our sick society that uses an old and iutdated Constitution to allow the proliferation of immoral bad behavior and language in the interests of so called freedom. As a result we also have extremes of behavior from those we should be able, confidently to trust, like the banks and bankers. But its spread too. The VW issue, to me is very sick, meaning irresponsible behavior from people we ought to be able to trust is spreading.

 

America's Constitution has never been copied by any other country. I wonder why.
Maybe its because it doesnt work.
Maybe its because it is abused.
Maybe its abused by people who have been desentitized by violence to the extent that they
have no regard for human life.
I always thought that legislation could be amended.
Why doesnt the President seek an amendment to the constitution regarding the 2A and have the
people vote on it at the next election.
If the people want 2A changed, then they will vote for it.......or is it all just too hard.
We all know what happens when a decision is too difficult to make....nothing....

 

You apparently don't understand how our government works.
To change the 2A, you have to have an amendment to repeal it.
You will need 2/3 of both houses of congress to approve it, then you will need 3/4 of the state legislatures to approve it..... good luck.
The bill of rights in our constitution is there to limit what the government can do to it's people. In other words it guarantees our freedoms.
Other countries have not copied it because their governments are not willing to restrict themselves. They don't want to give power to the people of the country.

 

The comparison itself is quite faulty. To begin with, is limiting violence in general to focus exclusively on firearm-related violence, as if the others simply do not matter, which suggests to some that those who are murdered through other means simply do not matter, and are not worth addressing.

Secondly, firearm-related violence cannot be compared to an illness without asking difficult questions, such as why are some members of society motivated to murder others with no regard for their lives, or the consequences of their actions? Just today there was a report of an eleven year old boy making the conscious and deliberate decision to murder an eight year old girl because she had a puppy that he wanted for himself. Why did he believe that he made the proper decision regarding the life of a fellow child? Why did he believe the puppy warranted murder of another?

Thirdly, the only way to properly compare firearm-related violence to a disease, is if it is compared to something like HIV/AIDS. A disease that is incurable, and the only manner of treatment is a lifetime regimen of medication that must be taken daily, all while causing severe side effects. And government has already addressed the spread of this disease, making it a felony to knowingly and deliberately infect another, just as it is a felony to knowingly and deliberately murder another.

Spell check is not always available to everyone.

As has been stated elsewhere, multiple times, there are between three hundred and five hundred million firearms in general circulation, with countless thousands more being added daily. The level of saturation has reached the point where reducing their numbers by any meaningful amount is an impossibility. Even a one percent reduction of three to five million firearms is an impossibility. Even if manpower and funding for such was not in short supply, the legal landscape does not allow for the confiscation of firearms from individuals who have not been stripped of their constitutional rights.

A noble effort for certain. But the mainstream media does what brings in the ratings, even if it has an adverse effect on general well being.

- - - Updated - - -

All levels of government are corrupted, and largely beyond the ability of the public to trust. And no amount of reform will change those bad actors responsible for these scandals if they are allowed to keep their jobs, and face no meaningful consequences for their actions.

 

I knew that. I googled the American Constitution sometime ago.
I also know that no-one in American has the balls to stand up to the NRA...so nothing
will change....
By saying no-one copies the Constitution because Governments dont want to restrict themselves say it all.
Your Government is therefore restricted from doing anything. So the end result therefore is...as I said..
Nothing will change...the killing will continue because of the violent society America is.