Just what is "common sense gun control?" How about a few examples?

[Duesenberg]

The M-16 style semi automatic weapon

The M16 is a select fire (fully automatic and semi-automatic) machine gun. They are quite rare in private hands, now fetching $15-25K+ and a great deal of paperwork and fees to legally own.

The semi-automatic AR15 (Armalite Rife 15 after the inventing company) is the mostly commonly sold rifle to private individuals in the world today.

 

[Lovinglight]

I oppose added gun control laws. Citizens dont even have enough to defend themselves from the militarized police much less the military if it ever came to that.

Its the planned and deliberate moral destruction of society thats causing the extreme violence and mayhem.

 

[pnewton]

Like what? Name something that would actually reduce gun-related crime in the US that’s actually doable.

The problem with this request is that it assumes only opinion. What is “doable” and what would reduce gun crime will be a reflection of one’s opinion on gun control in general. I have been burned by such request that have been asked with little sincerity. This whole thread is a “pearls before swine” trap.

 

[Duesenberg]

The problem with this request is that it assumes only opinion. What is “doable” and what would reduce gun crime will be a reflection of one’s opinion on gun control in general. I have been burned by such request that have been asked with little sincerity. This whole thread is a “pearls before swine” trap.

All you offered is a song-and-dance. There is some hard data out there – from both sides of the aisle that show that attempts at “gun control” do not reduce violent crime. That’s why I started the thread – to see if I was missing anything? The closest thing I got to a genuine idea is repealing the Second Amendment. That’s not going to happen. Even if it was, if would be such a hideous political process that it would super-harden more than half of the populous who wouldn’t think of actually complying with any confiscation order.

So I continue to wait for ideas pertaining to “common sense gun control.”

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

What happened to “Untrue. Check your facts?” Guess we will just let that one slide, eh? Do you ever admit you are wrong?

You modified your original statement with “among all the developed nations” and “major nation.”

You have not demonstrated a knowledge of any country that has more guns per capita than the US. So I wonder what country you were thinking of when you said “Untrue!” And why would you be in such a big hurry to vehemently deny it at first and then suddenly switch to saying it is a good thing to have more guns per capita. I ask you again, do you ever admit you are wrong?

 

[Vonsalza]

Duesenberg:

LeafByNiggle:

Then among all the developed nations, we lead the pack by a factor of about two or more. Can you name a major nation that has more guns per capita than the US?

Two new qualifications, how interesting.

In any event I think a large number of guns/capita is a VERY positive thing anyway…

What happened to “Untrue. Check your facts?” Guess we will just let that one slide, eh? Do you ever admit you are wrong?

You can’t make a man admit to what he simply doesn’t want to see.

When they’ve placed themselves beyond hope of reason, you must trust that they’ll be defeated at the ballot box.

 

[StephieNorthCo]

Just a small observation.

Sometimes you have to break something before (in order to) you can really fix it.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

I’ll check in again after the next mass shooting.

Well that didn’t take long, did it…

But as you were. No need for any knee jerk reactions calling for any restrictions on anyone’s rights. Maybe a few proposals for better mental health evaluations or making priests carry a loaded weapon at all times.

As I keep saying, it’s the mentality of the people in a society that reveres gun ownership which is the problem. This is not going to stop. It will be forever a regular occurrence and no-one will do anything about it. Your ‘freedom’ is more important than all these lives.

Those who live by the sword…

And again…we don’t have to wait long for these horrors to come around. But as you were. No need for changes. There is literally nothing you can do short of changing the culture.

You’ve left it too late. It’s part of the fabric of American society.

 

[Duesenberg]

And again…we don’t have to wait long for these horrors to come around. But as you were. No need for changes.

Yes, let’'s focus on this latest “mass-shooting” while ignoring the others who were killed in say inner-city slums during this same period.

No need for changes. There is literally nothing you can do short of changing the culture.

Lots of room for changes. We can begin to deal with:

• Media sensationalism of shootings and the shooters, which drives copycat killers.
• Mental illness.
• Over prescription of psychotropic drugs. (More than 90% of mass-killers are one such meds.)
• Growing drug abuse/drug dealing – particularly opioids and meth.
• Gangs.
• Poverty.
• Ignorance.
• Growing violence in our society driven by Hollywood and the video game producers.
• The loss of God and faith in God in this world – particularly in the West.

In other words, changing the culture. Banning law-abiding citizens from owning firearms isn’t going to do a darned thing.

 

[Duesenberg]

You can’t make a man admit to what he simply doesn’t want to see.

When they’ve placed themselves beyond hope of reason, you must trust that they’ll be defeated at the ballot box.

Are you self-reflecting? That’s what it appears like to me, given your earlier comments.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Yes, let’'s focus on this latest “mass-shooting” while ignoring the others who were killed in say inner-city slums during this same period.

How does more guns help inner city slums?

Lots of room for changes. We can begin to deal with:

• Over prescription of psychotropic drugs. (More than 90% of mass-killers are one such meds.)

Your statistical observation here is not proof that such drugs are to blame.

 

[Duesenberg]

How does more guns help inner city slums?

How does making it more difficult (or impossible) for law-abiding people to purchase firearms reduce the carnage in places like the South Side of Chicago?

Your statistical observation here is not proof that such drugs are to blame.

It certainly makes it an area to carefully study.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

How does more guns help inner city slums?

How does making it more difficult (or impossible) for law-abiding people to purchase firearms reduce the carnage in places like the South Side of Chicago?

So your suggestion that we consider the inner city slums instead of mass shootings was just a deflection because you didn’t like talking about mass shootings.

 

[Duesenberg]

So your suggestion that we consider the inner city slums instead of mass shootings was just a deflection because you didn’t like talking about mass shootings.

Please don’t ever try to speak for me. Not ever…

ALL violent crime (with or without the use of a firearm) needs to be considered. Without such an approach, no progress will be made. The notion that some have that “mass-killings” can be prevented if we just control guns more tightly is laughably ignorant – or a chilling agenda.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

So your suggestion that we consider the inner city slums instead of mass shootings was just a deflection because you didn’t like talking about mass shootings.

Please don’t ever try to speak for me. Not ever…

I just called it a deflection because you brought it up as an alternative to addressing mass shootings.

ALL violent crime (with or without the use of a firearm) needs to be considered.

Do you mean the only solutions you want to consider are those solutions that address every form of violent crime simultaneously? Or do you mean today we can try to solve mass shootings and the next day we can try to address home invasions?

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

And again…we don’t have to wait long for these horrors to come around. But as you were. No need for changes.

Yes, let’'s focus on this latest “mass-shooting” while ignoring the others who were killed in say inner-city slums during this same period.

No need for changes. There is literally nothing you can do short of changing the culture.

Lots of room for changes. We can begin to deal with:

• Media sensationalism of shootings and the shooters, which drives copycat killers.
• Mental illness.
• Over prescription of psychotropic drugs. (More than 90% of mass-killers are one such meds.)
• Growing drug abuse/drug dealing – particularly opioids and meth.
• Gangs.
• Poverty.
• Ignorance.
• Growing violence in our society driven by Hollywood and the video game producers.
• The loss of God and faith in God in this world – particularly in the West.

In other words, changing the culture. Banning law-abiding citizens from owning firearms isn’t going to do a darned thing.

So you admit to having all these problems and then…add monstrously easy access to weapons. I wonder what the result would be…

But we have a solution. We control how the media reports murder, we treat mental illness, we restrict access to drugs, we ban gangs, we lift everyone out of poverty, we educate everyone to a better standard, we stop people producing violent video games and we teach our children about God.

We also clamp down on domestic violence, teach everyone that suicide is a bad idea, end terrorism, prohibit excess drinking, stop racism…etc etc.

Get back to me when you’ve managed that, can you? It’s going to be difficult because no-one else on the planet has the problem with gun deaths that you do and if you insist that it’s not the number of guns that the problem (although you have more than anyone else), you obviously have a much worse problem with everything we have listed than anyone else in the world.

Gee, I mean, what sort of place are you living in where those problems cause so many more deaths than anywhere else? Why would that be? Is it really that bad in the US compared to anywhere else?

 

[catholic1seeks]

Would you make that argument about abortion?

Just because an evil will still happen doesn’t mean we shouldn’t attempt to limit it…

 

[Bradskii]

Would you make that argument about abortion?

Just because an evil will still happen doesn’t mean we shouldn’t attempt to limit it…

No, no. The argument is that easy access to abortions is not the problem. Restricting access will not solve it. People will still find ways of having abortions. It’s poverty and drugs and growing violence in society and the loss of God and faith. Etcetera.

 

[Duesenberg]

I just called it a deflection because you brought it up as an alternative to addressing mass shootings.

Don’t ever try to speak for me. I’m serious about that.

Do you mean the only solutions you want to consider are those solutions that address every form of violent crime simultaneously? Or do you mean today we can try to solve mass shootings and the next day we can try to address home invasions?

You will never “solve” mass shootings. The best you can do it make them far less common.

The ONLY way to reduce mass shooting is to study and seriously deal with a multitude of very difficult issues. Increasing “gun control” isn’t going to help things.

 

[Duesenberg]

No, no. The argument is that easy access to abortions is not the problem. Restricting access will not solve it. People will still find ways of having abortions. It’s poverty and drugs and growing violence in society and the loss of God and faith. Etcetera.

ODD how you can grasp the above, yet you cannot grasp that criminals will ALWAYS be able to illegal access firearms…