What can we do about the shootings?

[VanitasVanitatum]

And none of you could even suggest a solution.

I don’t care since it’s not practical and it’s not that fun so I don’t really bother coming up with ideas.

But the fact is, neither the NRA, nor the Republican members of Congress even WANT to offer a solution.

I expect as much from politicians.

 

[Nikolaite]

VanitasVanitatum:

This is a forum, don’t expect actual results.

We might be unable to put the thoughts into reality, that is true. Here all we can do is discuss ideas. And none of you could even suggest a solution. (Except vz71 whose idea was: “Arm everyone!!!”.)

But the fact is, neither the NRA, nor the Republican members of Congress even WANT to offer a solution.

There is a difference between the scenarios in which 1) there is a solution, and no one gives you a viable solution…and 2) there is NO solution, and people tell you there is no solution.

Simply carrying on that no one has offered you a solution when people are telling you there is none is silly.

 

[Economist]

I don’t care since it’s not practical and it’s not that fun so I don’t really bother coming up with ideas.

How would you know what is practical, if you cannot even suggest a solution? As for politicians, we all know ONE thing about them: they do not care about anything except their power and their re-election. I certainly send e-mails to them and emphasize they they are paid by us, and they should serve us. If you and others would do the same, together we could achieve what needs to be done.

There is a difference between the scenarios in which 1) there is a solution, and no one gives you a viable solution…and 2) there is NO solution, and people tell you there is no solution.

Simply carrying on that no one has offered you a solution when people are telling you there is none is silly.

Nonsense. There are several solutions, but certain people do not want to accept them.

 

[Nikolaite]

Nikolaite:

There is a difference between the scenarios in which 1) there is a solution, and no one gives you a viable solution…and 2) there is NO solution, and people tell you there is no solution.

Simply carrying on that no one has offered you a solution when people are telling you there is none is silly.

Nonsense. There are several solutions, but certain people do not want to accept them.

That’s what you claim. The proposal which I recall that you supplied is not an actual solution.

 

[phil3]

Yes I did, nothing can be done to stop it, Since we can pin point why it is happening, there is nothing we can do to stop it from happening. You can up with an unworkable solution.

You solution isnt a solution. Lets say you could get everyone that wants to obey a new law that you turn in all your weapons, pistols and rifles. all of them? who is left?

 

[CatholicELATeacher]

Many gun owners at the range I frequent have invested in reloading. Thinking of doing it myself. Especially helpful for pricier rounds like .45 Colt and .44 Magnum.

 

[Economist]

Yes I did, nothing can be done to stop it, Since we can pin point why it is happening, there is nothing we can do to stop it from happening. You can up with an unworkable solution.

Oh, so we just throw our arms in the air and start whining: “No solution, no solution! What shall we do now? Join the choir!!!” More school-yard massacre? Oh, so regrettable… but what can we do???

There is no immediate solution, that is certain. But there can be a long term solution, if only there would be no resistance from the NRA and their pocket-congressmen - and of course the millions of gun “enthusiasts”. So the solution is easy: get rid of the politicians - the proper way, VOTE them out of office. Ballots, not bullets.

And then start a rational approach, establish a national database. Track all gun sales. Make private selling of guns illegal and establish a very heavy fine for violation. Do not allow unlimited ammunition to be piled up, but allow the ONLY two legal usage, hunting and target practice. None of them require military style weapons. Make bump-stocks illegal, so they could not convert semi-automatic guns into full automatic.

The “fear” of losing the ability to fight the government is ridiculous. That “war” was lost a long time ago, just like the “right” to privacy.

And there is yet another solution. Sue the NRA until they do bankrupt!

 

[phil3]

I like I said, no solutions. Your solutions are fantasy solutions.

And then start a rational approach, establish a national database. Track all gun sales. Make private selling of guns illegal and establish a very heavy fine for violation. Do not allow unlimited ammunition

Define “rational”? What you think would be rational another will think is heavy handed. Next, explain to me how any of this would have and will have in the future stop a person from getting a gun and killing another person?

If you could do away with every single gun in the USA, people would start using knives. In fact today about 30% of all murders happen with a weapon other than a gun. Do you really think if all the guns went away that 70% of murders by gun would just stop? Nope there would be a portions that would move into the other catagory.

All your solutions are in reality just a reason to create an even bigger federal government work force.

Now is there a way to have technology solve the issue?

 

[Economist]

Define “rational”? What you think would be rational another will think is heavy handed. Next, explain to me how any of this would have and will have in the future stop a person from getting a gun and killing another person?

If you could do away with every single gun in the USA, people would start using knives. In fact today about 30% of all murders happen with a weapon other than a gun. Do you really think if all the guns went away that 70% of murders by gun would just stop? Nope there would be a portions that would move into the other catagory.

So the next time a mass slaughter happens - and it WILL happen - you just go to the grieving family and shrug and say: “well it is just too bad… but we can offer our thoughts and prayers”.

Your fundamental error (and it is a HUGE one) that you consider a partial solution to be equal to no solution. Just because we might not be able to prevent ALL future massacres it is not an excuse to shrug off the possibility to prevent SOME of them.

And as for the “knives” excuse, only a well trained ninja could perform a mass massacre. Guns do not need to be face-to-face, they can kill from a distance. They are the weapons of choice of the cowards.

The real solution will take a long time. Make the concept of murders socially unacceptable. (I remember there was someone named Jesus, who had similar ideas.) Make owning guns socially stigmatized. Follow the steps of making the usage of tobacco unacceptable. It might take a long time, but it will work.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

How would you know what is practical, if you cannot even suggest a solution?

It’s not within my power to do anything about the issue so this exercise isn’t practical and doesn’t serve much of a purpose. And it’s not cannot it just that I don’t want to.

 

[phil3]

. Make the concept of murders socially unacceptable

Do you really think murder is socially acceptable?

 

[phil3]

I dont think there is a partial solution. I have said there is NO solution. Nothing 100% of nothing you have offered will resolve it. Why? there are too many guns out there. There is an estimated 400 million gun in the usa and that estimate is, if anything, underestimated. I own 10 to 15 or a lot more. guns all of them at I have owned or have been in my family for 50+ years. One of them turned 100 last year, Only one of them registered. A 22 rifle. How are you going to get million of people to register their millions of guns?

The reason smoking has become unacceptable because was because it was done in social environments. At work, on planes, at restaurant, in theaters, walking down the street. I own 10 to 15 guns all of them at I have owned or have been in my family for 50+ years. Only one of them registered. A 22 rifle, In your utopia are you going to outlaw airguns? Go look up big bore air rifles or the Girandoni air rifle.

You have not offered one reasonable usable solution, but your argument, is at least you tried. So you get a participation trophy.

Are you going to outlaw CNC machines and metal 3d printers?

If there is a solution it is in technology and doesnt limit gun ownership.

 

[PetraG]

As you yourself noted, there are plenty of people who mean it when they talk about their cold dead hands.

There is more than one way to tell the truth, and that is particularly true in a room where the emotions are running high.

I just watched a good Youtube video and in it one of the point is made about high gun owner ship is that unlike other countries our military was very small in the early to mid 1800’s. I was expected that, if needed, we could muster a fighting force if needed from the population. I own several guns and have owned them for decades. I dont own any new guns. Most of the people I grew up with own the same guns they owned when we were kids. Yes, kids. I had my first 22 at 8. I have never shot any one either.

The gun ownership in the US was under 100 per person not that many years ago.
Shooting is becoming an increasingly popular hobby and I think there are probably more people who are obtaining permits to carry concealed weapons for personal safety. A lot of law-abiding citizens will be hanging onto their weapons for as long as they feel the criminal world is awash with them. (Don’t even get me started on the spike in the sales of high capacity rifles whenever there is political rhetoric suggesting their sales ought to be ended.)

 

[PetraG]

The reason smoking has become unacceptable because was because it was done in social environments. At work, on planes, at restaurant, in theaters, walking down the street…

Don’t forget the cancer risk of 2nd hand smoke. The popularity of cannabis use, meanwhile…

 

[Economist]

Do you really think murder is socially acceptable?

As long as the crowd’s response is “SHOOT THEM” and our “beloved leader” only smiles and jokes: “Only in the panhandle…”, yes it is acceptable as far as a large segment of the population is concerned. And it has nothing to do with the physical location of the panhandle, it has everything to do with the crowd accumulated at that location.

 

[vz71]

I have not heard any information on this yet, and am wondering if anyone else knows…
Were the weapons in the last few incidents legally obtained?

If not, the answer for the original question is obvious. Enforcement of the laws already on the books.

 

[phil3]

I supported Trump and will support him in the future. But I know how you feel, I felt the exact same way about Carter, Clinton. and Obama. I would add LBJ was I was 7 when he left office.

No, murder isnt socially acceptable, your rhetoric is the exact reason this country is headed for another civil war, except this one wont be fought with bullets. It will be fought using a Convention of the states.

 

[phil3]

BTW, I read here or on anther thread should I be allowed to own a bazooka or a tank. The answer is YES. I am not going to use them to hurt or kill people. These people that do the shooting are willing to die to do it. When someone not only devalue other lives but also their own it is difficult to stop them from committing such a crime. Solve that problem and you will solve the shooting problem.

So to economist, there is the start of a solution.

 

[Economist]

I supported Trump and will support him in the future. But I know how you feel, I felt the exact same way about Carter, Clinton. and Obama. I would add LBJ was I was 7 when he left office.

Which one(s) of them incited the crowd with calling others “invaders”, and used the expression of “sh*thole countries”? Trump is very good using derogatory words to describe the opposition. He said that he will pay the lawyer expenses if his supporters will beat up the other side. What is that is not inciting violence?

In his camp the murder of the other side is socially acceptable. He called the skinheads “good people” when one of them rammed his car into the crowd of the opposition. If you have no problem with this, that is your business. I do. If someone does not vehemently condemn the supremacists, then he belongs to the same category.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Why do you have to bring other politicians into this? Trump has his flaws and so do they, not sure what dodging it is supposed to do.