Says the troll who does nothing but anklebite from the cheap seats in every thread? Now that was good ironic humor. Did you intend it to be so?
Looks like the avg. woman in the UK…
Your thread, your rules. 
I don’t know who that is so I’ll take your word for it. Still hoping things turn out okay for the guy.
Great post, Gabby.
I’m most interested in the mental health aspect, and I’m thinking of minors here. This could also tie into mandatory reporters at the schools, a way for concerned parents to report their own children, that would coordinate efforts by law enforcement and schools. Specifically a system for psychotic behavior, or anti-social/ harm to self or others threats. Preventing a purchase is easier. Keeping guns out of the hands of homicidal individuals who already have guns in their home, in their possession is more difficult, as @Alrightmiami19c mentioned here.
I’m NOT talking about kids with routine stuff like anxiety disorders, or students who go to see the counselor because their parents are getting a divorce. I think that’s part of the fear here, that “mental illness” or “under a therapist’s supervision” could be expanded to include stuff that has no bearing on tendencies toward violence. There’s a risk here in establishing metrics that are sensitive, but don’t over identify.
Also, about the idea of metal detectors, limiting access to schools as prevention, I’m not opposed but these individuals with nihilistic, malevolent intent aren’t typically people with low IQ. Assume that these mass murderers have sufficient IQ and personality structure to carry out a malevolent plan. Fortunately, most do not succeed. It’s difficult to not teach the bad actor about what to avoid. One committed to malevolence, will see ‘holes’ in strategies, and adjust their plan. Instead of coming into the school, they may choose to shoot up the football game, for example. They may learn the patterns of the school guards, rendering them ineffective.
Just throwing ideas out there.
1 Like
Well, for it’s worth;
I going to start out with something I wrote on the other thread:
Look as someone who has carried a gun since age 10, went in the military at 17 and used one to fight for country and home, I know what it takes to be a responsible gun carrier. There is nothing wrong with having a thorough background check, I think there should be an age limit on when you can acquire certain weapons. I believe in thorough training, this is no brag, but, I probably have 10,000 hours of training just on weapons systems alone. Asking someone to undergo 40 hours of training is nothing. You want a CCW, then train for it. Police officers (on average) go through about 800 hours of basic training, asking someone to go through 24 to 40 hours of basic fundamentals is not much to ask to keep your right to bear arms.
Ok, lets expand on this: We require training for every profession, and yet, we really don’t require anything for carrying a weapon. I base that on LIMITED KNOWLEDGE of each state guidelines, but, I don’t think I am far off.
-
Have a national standard of a minimum of 40 hours to acquire any gun, that’s includes teenagers who like to hunt and shoot sport clays. We require kids to have a course on hunter and firearms safety, drivers education, but, why do we stop there? Cost? Well, here is how you fix that: each state places a 10 cent tax on all alcohol and cigarette purchases. We have to pay a gasoline tax to drive a car, so, pay a tax to carry and own a gun. No one would be denied training because they didn’t have the money. Have a gun and not a carry license: laws on the books for that, enforce it.
-
I am in favor of a more thorough background check, running you through NCIC is not enough because too many criminals fall through the cracks. The background check should require what is called a “Public Trust Clearance” which is the first step the USG takes in checking your background for employment. You sign a waiver about your medical records, no signed wavier, no job. This takes anywhere from 2 weeks to a month and you should start the process as soon as you enter your class.
-
I am in favor of an age restriction for people wanting to buy any weapon system other than a handgun, shotgun, or “hunting rifle” From what I have seen from today’s young troops, 21 is the minimum age for more advanced weapons systems. I don’t use “AR” because it is really a minor component to killing. I can take a Ruger 10/22 with several extended magazines and kill far more people than the Florida shooter.
-
I am in favor of a 7 day waiting period, even for those with a license. I want to buy someone a shotgun or Glock for Christmas, I just need to plan better.
-
I am in favor of training children from age 10 on the basics of situational awareness and accountability. This “active shooter” is not going away in our life time, if not some nutcase murderer, it will just be some terrorist. It’s the world we live in. deal with it. Train our children from an early age to at least be aware of the world they live in, simple things. Fucking gaming is not real life. One year of ROTC should be required for every boy or girl before they graduate high school.
-
I am in favor of establishing a federal agency that is only devoted to finding and preventing school shooters. There are over 17, 985 police departments in the United States. Each one of those departments can at least establish a “liaison officer”, some point of contact for their area. Establish a federal “hotline” staffed with IT experts, police/agents / so when a call comes in like they called on the Florida shooter, hopefully, nothing would be lost through the cracks. If I see a You tube video of some sick child in Spokane , Madison, or Mobile I would know who to call. You need a national clearing center to report too, we do this with terrorism, why not with possible school shooters?
-
I am favor of allowing teachers to carry concealed. I know that is not in favor with the masses, but, if I had a child, I would want someone armed close, better than using your body to shield students. I am in favor of metal detectors and automatized lock down doors. You cannot get on a plane without going through one, what’s the problem with schools? You cannot get out of the CDC without someone operating the doors. Too harsh for the children? Really? Maybe a dose of reality could help some of these kids.
-
I am in favor that you cannot buy a gun at a gun show unless you have the carry license. Want a gun? Have a license. In my state you cannot buy a car without an insurance card.
Conclusion:
I am a firm believer in the United States Constitution and (IMHO) that document is being actively attacked every day. From Russian bots to the socialistic liberal media, the Constitution is being chipped and broken apart. There are over 100 million gun owners in the US, with around 270 to 300 million guns in circulation. Do you actually believe that it is possible to “ban guns”? That’s as stupid as thinking you can deport 11 million illegal aliens. There are 1.3 million car accidents every year, with over 3000 deaths every day. You going to ban cars? No. because they aren’t a constitutional issue.
This is where I part ways with the NRA. Through the history of warfare, you have to change tactics to win. The Second Amendment is being attacked, ok, make some changes that require someone to work for something instead of taking their rights away, because I don’t care what you do , you will never, ever, deter a terrorist, drug dealer, gun runner, human trafficker, violent criminal or nutcase in doing anything.
In all this “talk” one thing seems to be missing. The fact that people are responsible for their actions. It really is not the guns fault you decided to kill. If I want to, I could take one of my medieval maces into a primary school and kill as many as possible, the only thing that will stop me is the first responders. But, the deed is done, I was responsible, just like the Florida kid is responsible.
How will this change policy? Well, it will make things more difficult for the honest citizen, do nothing too the criminal, perhaps the extended background checks, license requirements, open medical records will stop some mental patient from obtaining a weapons. Perhaps the federal “active shooter agency” will allow law enforcement to focus on a single issue like we do on terrorism. Maybe, we could get to some asshole before he becomes the latest Facebook star.
Here is the scary thing, look at the headline below. This outcry over weapons is now effecting the First Amendment. When will it start chewing away at the third and fourth?
My 2 cents.
8 Likes
I think this needs a new thread as it sounds like a far more interesting debate. How many do you think you could take out? Would you do better with a battleaxe? What if some of them were armed as well?
1 Like
But not the Europeans for some reason.
Yeah, talking about how many CHILDREN someone could kill is an interesting debate. The internet really is a shithole.
The freedom behind it, isn’t.
I didn’t say this was ONE idea to fix EVERY issue.
Since we have yet to have a female mass shooter, as far as I know, I’ll give her a pass.
Population density. In the US denser populations seem to breed antisocial behavior. In Europe you can talk to a stranger on the bus.
Several things: I don’t think 18 year olds are adults. For young hunters, my law wouldn’t say that they couldn’t be in possession of a shotgun or rifle belonging to their parents. They just can’t buy anything themselves.
We could raise the age for hanguns and semi-auto rifles to 25, unless one has honorably served in the military, or is in a law enforcement. I’m also fine with a waiting period, but since the background checks are done by a computer in seconds, I don’t think making people wait a week will make much difference.
I would probably continue to buy sell and trade firearms with close friends and family. I don’t think this is a problem. It’s not where guns are finding their way into the wrong hands.
That New York law was poorly written, perhaps in bad faith, by people who just want to confiscate as many firearms as they can. It should be obvious that it shouldn’t apply to people suffering from insomnia or depression. It should only be applied to people who are a danger to others.
And then there is a right to due process, and I haven’t figured it out yet, but I’m just a knuckle dragger. I don’t think a doctor or nurse should be able to check a few boxes on a report and strip you of your rights. Smarter minds, working in good faith could come up with a better answer that has checks and balances.
Also, people will say in the wake of these shootings that “he posted threats on Facebook!” Again, due process. What are the authorities supposed to do about that exactly? If the kid is clever he can just say, “yeah my account was hacked and someone posted a bunch of crazy stuff. I didn’t know anything about it.”
My recommendations aren’t intended to be perfect anyway, perfect is an illusion and the enemy of the good. If we could cast a net that was 95% effective that would save countless lives. Also, if you could wave a magic wand and get rid of all guns I believe these people would just find another way. As Powerpuff says, the kids who carry out the mass shootings aren’t stupid.
2 Likes
You have 18, 19 and 20 year olds who are still in HS.
Which is unlikely.
But the opposition to a plan like that will focus on the 5%.
Yes, the opposition will focus on the 5% but I think a lot of them aren’t intellectually honest people acting in good faith. I think if we outlawed “evil assault weapons” entirely the next shooter would just use a pump shotgun, and then the antigun crowd would immediately say we should ban these evil shotguns!
Which is why I don’t blame the NRA for refusing to give an inch.
As far as the mass shooters not being smart I would refer you to Powerpuff’s post.
1 Like
Probably not. I’d imagine the sharp edge of the axe would get lodged in meat and bone, while the blunt form of the mace will just bash skulls and break bones … far more efficient in terms of strikes per minute … of course controlling for length and weight of the two weapons…
Same thing with arms bud.
Agree with pretty much all of this in concept. Except this:
I don’t think you should have to pay the equivalent of a sin tax to exercise a constitutional right. What’s next? A 10 cent tax to not be illegally searched? Or a 10 cent tax to practice your religion?
2 Likes
I was a United States Marine at 18. My brother was fighting in Iraq at 18 (also a Marine).
I get the idea in concept, but I don’t understand the obsession with using age as a barrier and, honestly, there isn’t a huge difference between 18 and 21 imo.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I think this is the perspective most of us gun owners come from. Since banning the evil black rifles doesn’t address the root of the problem.
1 Like