Gun control ideas
- Thread starter Bigred_inSD
- Start date
White Flash
New member
Last edited by a moderator:
White Flash
New member
glad to here someone else say this. as far as guncontrol, i'm all for confiscating guns from criminals and illegal firearms, but we crossed the line on having guns in america a loooooong time ago. we have millions upon millions of guns that have been around long before fancy means of tracking them.
i do think parents should be responsible for what their children do, we let kids get away with too much nowadays.
i read in the dallas morning news about a month ago that some kid hacked a guy to death in dallas while he was on his morning jog, the victims wife has since commited suicide. it's all a very unfortunate incident to say the least. all i heard was how this "kid" (about 20 years old) had a history of mental illness...you think he had mental illness? i'll say he does, he hacks people to death with machetes out of impulse. i'd say he's pretty fricking sick. the dumbassery in this country is getting out of hand.
HuskerMerc44
New member
Gum can be had far too easily.
It's cheap and marketed to kids.
Concealed very well in a pocket.
Some of it can pack a punch.
All joking aside.
I agree 100% with fingerprint identification.
I don't know if mental evaluation is a good thing or not.
On paper it seems great.
But, knowing society... results will be used against you in other ways.
The "thought police" will finally become a real thing perhaps.
BigRedBuster
Active member
knapplc
Active member
Here's my idea. It's less gun control and more society being more responsible toward mass shootings.
I can dig up the stats if you like, but in general, gun homicides are going down in America, a trend that's been ongoing since the 1980s. What's occurring at a semi-regular clip are mass shootings, which the government describes as a shooting in which four or more people, not including the gunman, are killed (paraphrasing).
So, are the GUNS the problem? Or something else? Mental health?
I think it's reasonably obvious it's a combination of several factors. Outlawing guns won't fix the issue (criminals will always get guns), nor is this something we really need. GUNS, per se, are not bad. Focusing solely on mental health won't fix it, since it's not only the mentally ill that go on shooting sprees.
My theory is that the press, unintentionally, bears a great deal of responsibility for these repeated shootings, and with one simple change in how they cover these stories, they could affect the frequency of such shootings.
That change: Don't report the name(s) of the shooter(s).
Keep them anonymous, just like they do for sexual assault victims. As a group "the press" decided years ago not to publish assault victims' (or "accusers") names, for several very obvious good reasons.
By keeping the names of these shooters anonymous, we take away the glamour of such crimes. People are less likely to copycat the shootings if they know they won't be immortalized. I theorize that this publicity is one attraction to such shooters.
So there's my idea.
I can dig up the stats if you like, but in general, gun homicides are going down in America, a trend that's been ongoing since the 1980s. What's occurring at a semi-regular clip are mass shootings, which the government describes as a shooting in which four or more people, not including the gunman, are killed (paraphrasing).
So, are the GUNS the problem? Or something else? Mental health?
I think it's reasonably obvious it's a combination of several factors. Outlawing guns won't fix the issue (criminals will always get guns), nor is this something we really need. GUNS, per se, are not bad. Focusing solely on mental health won't fix it, since it's not only the mentally ill that go on shooting sprees.
My theory is that the press, unintentionally, bears a great deal of responsibility for these repeated shootings, and with one simple change in how they cover these stories, they could affect the frequency of such shootings.
That change: Don't report the name(s) of the shooter(s).
Keep them anonymous, just like they do for sexual assault victims. As a group "the press" decided years ago not to publish assault victims' (or "accusers") names, for several very obvious good reasons.
By keeping the names of these shooters anonymous, we take away the glamour of such crimes. People are less likely to copycat the shootings if they know they won't be immortalized. I theorize that this publicity is one attraction to such shooters.
So there's my idea.
Last edited by a moderator:
I AM FOOT FOOT
Donor
great idea! the only problem I can see with it is people complaining about coverups and being left in the dark on details, guns themselves are not the problem. society and mental issues are. the Oklahoma City bombing is a good example. mass killing and destruction done by a wacko by something other than a gun. most of us are with in minutes of all the needed ingredients to replicate this. no questions asked. with the exception of a trigger device id guess.
To have a meaningful discussion on this topic, I think all parties need too agree on three key stipulation.
1. Nobody is going to come and take away your guns.
2. Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier.
3. Focusing only on a certain gun type (hand guns, assault rifles) sends us down a rabbit hole and leads to ineffective band aide solutions.
Any objections?
1. Nobody is going to come and take away your guns.
2. Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier.
3. Focusing only on a certain gun type (hand guns, assault rifles) sends us down a rabbit hole and leads to ineffective band aide solutions.
Any objections?
BigRedBuster
Active member
People get all worked up about gun violence when these horrible mass shootings happen and it's all over the news. Fact is, there are way more people killed by gun violence that isn't involved with a mass shooting than the ones that are. But, those aren't plastered all over CNN.
This article talks about who owns guns in America.
LINK
As it says, the vast majority of guns are owned by white men in rural America. Hmmmm.....Now, where is the vast majority of gun violence? It sure as heck isn't by white men in rural America.
So, if guns are the problem, why wouldn't white men in rural America be where the most gun violence is happening?
This is a social issue....NOT a gun issue.
So, let's go back to the mass shootings that get plastered all over CNN. What else did they find in these pathetic people's apartment? Pipe bombs. Hmmmm.....what is the favorite form of mass killings in other countries? Bombs. Bombs are EASY to make from every day stuff if someone i so inclined.
I get so sick of reading articles that show how much more gun violence we have than other countries. OK....that may be true. Now, what a more meaningful statistic would be is how many people in various countries die from violence in general no matter if it's from a gun, bomb...etc.
My point is, if these scum bags didn't have guns, they would have simply used the very simple pipe bombs they already had made. The Boston Marathon killings weren't from guns, they were from a very simple bomb.
Keying on the guns blinds us to the real issues in our society. Until we are willing to talk about those, killings will continue no matter what the weapon.
But......much of that conversation is going to be very politically incorrect so nobody in the public life is going to be willing to discuss it openly. It is much easier to talk about guns.
This article talks about who owns guns in America.
LINK
As it says, the vast majority of guns are owned by white men in rural America. Hmmmm.....Now, where is the vast majority of gun violence? It sure as heck isn't by white men in rural America.
So, if guns are the problem, why wouldn't white men in rural America be where the most gun violence is happening?
This is a social issue....NOT a gun issue.
So, let's go back to the mass shootings that get plastered all over CNN. What else did they find in these pathetic people's apartment? Pipe bombs. Hmmmm.....what is the favorite form of mass killings in other countries? Bombs. Bombs are EASY to make from every day stuff if someone i so inclined.
I get so sick of reading articles that show how much more gun violence we have than other countries. OK....that may be true. Now, what a more meaningful statistic would be is how many people in various countries die from violence in general no matter if it's from a gun, bomb...etc.
My point is, if these scum bags didn't have guns, they would have simply used the very simple pipe bombs they already had made. The Boston Marathon killings weren't from guns, they were from a very simple bomb.
Keying on the guns blinds us to the real issues in our society. Until we are willing to talk about those, killings will continue no matter what the weapon.
But......much of that conversation is going to be very politically incorrect so nobody in the public life is going to be willing to discuss it openly. It is much easier to talk about guns.
cornographic
Banned
There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok.
However, the first child to die from a gunshot after Sandy Hook was the kid who found his uncle's gun as he played while the parents wrapped presents downstairs. The gun owner, the uncle was an Oklahoma State Trooper. Well trained. Well practiced. Made a fatal error.
Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."
We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?